Author Topic: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations  (Read 1024 times)

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« on: April 06, 2021, 11:44:25 pm »
The theory that all politics is reducible to economics is Marxist. One of our objectives has always been to undermine this False Left worldview, which implicitly sees all people as fundamentally similar units all in pursuit of material gain. Our True Left worldview, in contrast, is one which sees people as fundamentally different. It is a worldview of moral dualism, of Good vs Evil:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_in_cosmology#Moral_dualism

A war of Good vs Evil will not be ended by making both sides more wealthy. It will only end when one side has totally exterminated the other.

More leftists are starting to get it:

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/research-states-obvious-white-racist-224500201.html

Quote
New Research States the Obvious: White Racist Fears, Not Economic Anxiety, Likely Drove the Capitol Insurrection

Some mainstream (re: white) writers and thinkers have instinctually sought to find a way to point to ‘economic anxiety’ as an explanation for why hundreds of mostly white Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol in January. Now, at least one expert is conceding the obvious: it was the racism.

We previously LOL’d at a Washington Post suggestion that the largely middle-class, gainfully employed members of the Jan. 6 MAGA mob were driven to storm the Capitol because they are victims of economic anxiety.

But Robert A. Pape, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago and head of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats, has amassed and analyzed demographic data on the Capitol insurrectionists that he says show a curious commonality in their background.

The Capitol mob, made up almost 95% of white people, had a significant percentage of people who “typically hail from places where non-White populations are growing fastest,” the researcher wrote in an op-ed published in the Washington Post on Tuesday.

The study’s findings were based on the CPOST’s evaluation of the profiles of 377 of the Capitol insurrectionists, said Pape, who added that the collection of people came from all over the country—most notably from counties whose electorates are diversifying and going blue.

From the Washington Post:

    By far the most interesting characteristic common to the insurrectionists’ backgrounds has to do with changes in their local demographics: Counties with the most significant declines in the non-Hispanic White population are the most likely to produce insurrectionists who now face charges.

    For example, Texas is the home of 36 of the 377 charged or arrested nationwide. The majority of the state’s alleged insurrectionists — 20 of 36 — live in six quickly diversifying blue counties such as Dallas and Harris (Houston). In fact, all 36 of Texas’s rioters come from just 17 counties, each of which lost White population over the past five years. Three of those arrested or charged hail from Collin County north of Dallas, which has lost White population at the very brisk rate of 4.3 percent since 2015.

...
Speaking with the New York Times about the CPOST study, Pape said his initial expectation going into the study was that leftover pain from the 2008 recession would emerge as a motivator of the Capitol attack. But then he explained that additional analysis of the data shows that what really drove the insurrectionists’ violence is the age-old racist idea that white people not having societal dominance—or the impression of dominance—justifies them violently lashing out so as to hold onto power.

From the New York Times:
...
    “If you look back in history, there has always been a series of far-right extremist movements responding to new waves of immigration to the United States or to movements for civil rights by minority groups,” Mr. Pape said. “You see a common pattern in the Capitol insurrectionists. They are mainly middle-class to upper-middle-class whites who are worried that, as social changes occur around them, they will see a decline in their status in the future.”

See also:

https://www.theroot.com/thats-a-reach-washington-post-claims-financial-problem-1846242278

https://www.theroot.com/the-whitest-insurrections-of-all-time-1846048266
« Last Edit: August 27, 2021, 09:45:23 pm by 90sRetroFan »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-anyone-still-shocked-fear-153650869.html

Quote
Why is anyone still shocked that fear propels white hostility and violence?
...
In his initial findings, detailed in an op-ed for The Washington Post, Pape determined the rioters to be 95 percent white, 85 percent male, middle and upper middle class, and — significantly — to hail mostly from counties where the white population is shrinking fastest and the non-white growing most aggressively. Such counties were six times more likely to produce rioters than counties where demographic change was least dramatic, a disparity that held even when controlled for various variables.

Coincidence? Pape says the chances are less than one in a thousand. So assuming his findings hold, we may conclude that, while there was anxiety here, economics had nothing to do with it. This anxiety was racial.

And another word for anxiety is fear.

We seldom discuss the degree to which that primal emotion has driven U.S. history where race and tribe are concerned. And yet, it has always been there. It ripped the Choctaw, the Cherokee and the Creeks from their ancestral lands. It awakened Jefferson “like a firebell in the night.” It forced George, Noriyuki and Norman out of their homes and into camps ringed by barbed wire. It got Emmett maimed, Sam skinned and Mary hanged upside down and set afire.
...
This fear has only grown more acute since we learned that these are the last days of that majority, that soon, no racial group will be able to claim numerical dominance. Some white people find it frightening to envision a nation without white people calling all the shots. And bad things tend to happen when white people — particularly white men — get scared. Hence, the tea party and the birthers. Hence, Pittsburgh, Charlottesville and Charleston. Hence, the spike in voter suppression. Hence Donald Trump.

And, hence a mob of mostly white, mostly men, smashing through the sacred space of the U.S. Capitol. Economic anxiety? Who’s more economically anxious than Black and brown people? And how many Capitols have they breached?

To answer that question is to understand why there is something vaguely insulting in Robert Pape’s surprise. History tells us what’s happening here. Previous studies have quantified what’s happening here. Some of us have spent years declaiming what’s happening here.

So how is it a learned man is surprised by what’s happening here?

A disruptive demographic change is upon us. It represents a challenge, yes, but also an opportunity. To meet the one and seize the other will require a clear-eyed view of what we are and some strategy that delivers us to what we ought to be. The particulars of that are beyond the scope of this column, but there’s one thing we must do at a minimum. When frightened white people act out?

Stop being surprised.

Also, shoot them.

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
https://us.yahoo.com/news/opinion-jayne-poor-white-voters-140100477.html

Quote
Explaining why people vote how they do is a complex task with no simple answers. But the questions above are at the core of "The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone."

The book, published this year, was written by Heather McGhee, and it provides a damning item-by-item inventory of how systemic racism has held back this nation over the past several decades. But there is more to it. The gist, if it is possible to summarize a 300-page book in one sentence, is that many white Americans vote against their own self-interest because policies that might help them would also help minorities.

Which doesn't make sense. White Americans, after all, make up the largest cohort of the uninsured and impoverished and minimum-wage workers — even if people of color are more likely to fall into those categories. Yet whites, including poor whites, comprised the bulk of Donald Trump supporters.

Of course it makes sense. "Whites" are acting in their self-interest: it's just that their self-interest is on a larger scale than that of individual economic security. To put it another way, "whites" are acting in their self-interest not as individuals (which is what False Leftists consider to be the only valid self-interest) but as "whites" ie. as members of the "white" tribe. Until more leftists stop complaining that "whites" are acting "irrationally" and instead understand they are acting very rationally, but merely with priorities other than their own pocketbooks, they cannot understand what is required to stop rightism.

Quote
To illustrate this, McGhee writes about swimming pools. In the mid-1900s, American cities commonly had grand community swimming pools, developed as a testament to civic funding and civic pride. When pools were desegregated, countless communities chose to close those facilities; it would be better for everybody to have nothing rather than provide a service that includes Black people.

This is what I mean. If "whites" thought as individuals, then obviously keeping the pool open would be rational. But "whites" were not thinking as individuals. They were thinking: "If the pool becomes a venue where multiethnic interaction becomes psychologically normalized, this will threaten the survival of white identity in the long-term." Once you realize what their actual objective is, not as individuals but as "whites", their choices turn out to be rational, but in service of a tribal objective. You cannot fight them effectively until you realize what their objective is.

Quote
Such thinking has diminished our society and fractured our sense of community. And it answers the overriding question posed by McGhee's book: Why can't we have nice things?

Because the most inferior fraction in our society would rather have "whiteness".

Which brings us onto the next question: should the left be merely about getting nice things, or should the left be about permanently getting rid of most the inferior fraction of society first?
« Last Edit: July 18, 2021, 10:11:54 pm by 90sRetroFan »

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Another report acknowledging rightists aren't driven by "economic anxiety", but pure tribalism:

Quote
A terrifying new theory: Fake news and conspiracy theories as an evolutionary strategy

Social scientist Michael Bang Petersen on why people believe outrageous lies — as a tool in violent group conflict
[...]
But the ignorance perspective has a deep hold on us because it appeals to the Enlightenment notion that we are motivated to pursue truth. We are "the thinking animal," right? The important part of that expression may be "animal." Human beings have an evolutionary history, and deception is commonplace in the animal world because it confers evolutionary advantage. There's good reason to believe we're not so different, other than the fact that humans are ultra-social creatures. In ancestral and evolutionary terms, being part of a successful social group was every bit as essential as food and water. So deception among humans evolved from group conflicts. That's the thesis of a recent paper called "The Evolutionary Psychology of Conflict and the Functions of Falsehood" by the Danish political scientists Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen and American anthropologist John Tooby.
https://www.salon.com/2021/08/08/a-terrifying-new-theory-fake-news-and-conspiracy-theories-as-an-evolutionary-strategy/

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #4 on: September 02, 2021, 11:33:36 pm »
https://twitter.com/michelle_byoung/status/1432825399373975553

Quote
Almost every problem we have in this country right now is about White people’s FEAR of demographic change & the GOP exploiting those fears for political gain. It’s ALL about race & racism. These dots are OBVIOUS & EASY TO CONNECT.

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2021, 03:36:13 pm »
Quote
Extremist segregationalist beliefs rose in the postwar South even in times of plenty, because the Federal government was daring to enforce laws that undermined their sense of supremacy.

Contentness in life often depends on those social factors more than actual economic ones. So if people feel like they're "being replaced," especially by people they are used to looking down upon, they'll become extremists no matter what the reality is like.

Even with Trumpists, they tend to be better off financially than the average American, not worse (google "Trump voters richer" for tons of articles). But they think things are getting worse because their sense of hierarchy and privilege are being attacked by those damn uppity egalitarians, thinking they can judge them, how dare they, etc. It should be no surprise then, that research repeatedly finds that the biggest predictors of Trump support are racial, ethnic, and notably gender prejudice.
https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/pjekum/a_generation_of_american_men_give_up_on_college_i/hbyahdb/

Quote
Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote

Support for Donald J. Trump in the 2016 election was widely attributed to citizens who were “left behind” economically. These claims were based on the strong cross-sectional relationship between Trump support and lacking a college education. Using a representative panel from 2012 to 2016, I find that change in financial wellbeing had little impact on candidate preference. Instead, changing preferences were related to changes in the party’s positions on issues related to American global dominance and the rise of a majority–minority America: issues that threaten white Americans’ sense of dominant group status. Results highlight the importance of looking beyond theories emphasizing changes in issue salience to better understand the meaning of election outcomes when public preferences and candidates’ positions are changing.
https://www.pnas.org/content/115/19/E4330

Quote
Hegemonic masculinity predicts 2016 and 2020 voting and candidate evaluations

Donald J. Trump’s history-making ascension from nonpolitician to president of the United States has been attributed to the antiestablishment, antielitist, and nativist populism of Trump voters, as well as to sexism, racism, homophobia, and xenophobia. Based on the findings of seven studies involving 2,007 people, men’s and women’s endorsement of hegemonic masculinity predicted support for Trump over and beyond the aforementioned factors, even when controlling for political party affiliation. Results highlight the importance of looking beyond social identity–based conceptualizations of masculinity to fully consider how men’s and women’s endorsement of cultural ideologies about masculinity legitimate patriarchal forms of dominance and reify gender-, race-, and class-based hierarchies.
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/2/e2020589118

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2021, 01:19:10 pm »
We've all heard about immigrants being willing to work for lower pay and hence being preferred by employers; that is perfectly explicable by economics. The following, on the other hand:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-farm-hired-white-immigrants-195309719.html

Quote
JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — Six Black farmworkers in Mississippi say in a new lawsuit that their former employer brought white laborers from South Africa to do the same jobs they were doing, and that the farm has been violating federal law by paying the white immigrants more for the same type of work.
...
The lawsuit said the farm violated regulations of a foreign worker visa program, which requires equal treatment of U.S. workers and their immigrant counterparts. It seeks an unspecified amount in damages, including money the U.S. workers say they were shorted because of the uneven pay scale.
...
Four of the plaintiffs — Andrew Johnson, Wesley Reed, Gregory Strong and Richard Strong — said they did agricultural work from February through November and Pitts Farm Partnership usually paid them the minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, with $8.25 an hour for weekend work.

Two of the plaintiffs, Stacy Griffin and James Simpson, drove trucks for the farming operation during harvest time, usually from late July or early August through November. The lawsuit said they had been paid $9 an hour since 2018.

The farm paid the white workers from South Africa $9.87 an hour in 2014 and that rate increased most years until it reached $11.83 an hour in 2020, the lawsuit said.
...
The lawsuit said the Pitts family hired a white supervisor who gave employees their daily duties and had the power to hire and fire workers.

“Occasionally, the supervisor used racial slurs,” the lawsuit said. “Pitts Farms was informed about the supervisor’s use of racial slurs and did nothing.”

The lawsuit said the farm started bringing in white workers from South Africa in 2014, using a placement firm to hire seasonal labor, and that from 2014 to 2020, the farm did not make the same effort to recruit U.S. workers as it did to obtain immigrant workers.

guest55

  • Guest
Re: State subverters
« Reply #7 on: September 20, 2021, 09:06:28 pm »
Animosity toward minority groups predicts support for Donald Trump, regardless of party alignment
Quote
New research published in the journal American Political Science Review revealed that people who expressed extreme dislike toward Democratically-aligned minority groups were more likely to approve of Donald Trump when he made his way into politics — regardless of their party alignment. Animosity toward these groups did not predict support for other Republican candidates, suggesting the effect is unique to Trump.

Study authors Lilliana Mason and her colleagues note that American U.S. political parties are becoming further divided on key aspects of identity such as race and religion. It follows that party support can potentially be influenced by a person’s affiliation with social groups, as well as their feelings toward outgroups. (In other-words, TRIBALISM not nationalism!)

The researchers suggest this to be especially true in the case of support for former president Donald Trump, whose political campaigns were heavily centered around vilifying outgroups. Trump was known for his unapologetic and hateful rhetoric directed at numerous marginalized groups — notably, marginalized groups that were Democratically-aligned. Mason and her team wanted to explore whether animosity toward these minority groups may be partly driving support for Trump.
https://www.psypost.org/2021/09/animosity-toward-minority-groups-predicts-support-for-donald-trump-regardless-of-party-alignment-61874

Trump is a tribalist and a barbarian as are his supporters!!!

See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/trump-a-fascist/

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2021, 09:58:36 pm »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2021, 10:00:37 pm »
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-23/eu-nationalists-vow-to-keep-migrants-out-despite-boon-to-economy

Quote
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban hosted the leaders of the Czech Republic, Serbia and Slovenia at a demographic-focused forum in Budapest, where he said immigration was a threat to the survival of western civilization rather than an antidote.
...
The stance also clashes with a raft of economic studies that show immigration boosts the economies and wages of countries that open their doors to foreign workers. The International Monetary Fund has said that for every 1 percentage-point increase in the inflow of immigrants relative to total employment in rich nations, output increases by 1% within five years.

They will not be convinced by economic arguments because they care about being Westerners, not about the economy. Therefore they will only be persuaded to open their borders if threatened by something else that will make it even harder for them to be Westerners than open borders e.g. nukes. So long as nuclear-armed countries lack the stomach to nuke them, Turandom countries will keep their borders closed. There is nothing mysterious about this. Economic appeals will have no effect on those who do not care about economics, just like ethical appeals will have no effect on those who do not care about ethics.

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Yet another reason why democracy needs to be abolished. The electorate is so unbelievably retarded that they can be swayed by any sort of propaganda...

Quote
84% of Trump voters worry about discrimination against whites and think Christianity is under attack

New polling released today by Project Home Fire in partnership with University of Virginia's Center for Politics has found that Trump voters are animated by concerns about anti-white discrimination and the fate of Christianity in America.
[...]
The polling found that 52% of Trump voters said they strongly agreed with the statement, "I worry that discrimination against whites will increase significantly in the next few years," a figure that rises to 84% when including those that somewhat agree. An even higher percentage, 61%, strongly agreed with the notion that "Christianity is under attack in American today," which also rises to 84% when including people who somewhat agree.

Meanwhile, Biden voters largely disagreed. On both counts, only 38% of Biden voters strongly or somewhat agreed that anti-white discrimination is a problem and that Christianity is under attack. 91% of Democrats strongly or somewhat agreed that "system racism in America is a real and serious problem."

Further polling conducted by the group revealed just how tied to immigration Trump voter's concerns were; upwards of 80% of them strongly or somewhat agreed that they were worried about paying higher taxes due to illegal immigrants using healthcare, welfare, and education resources. A similar percentage were strongly or somewhat in agreement with the notion that they would "suffer personally" from the US being more socialist as a result of immigration.

"Trump voters are deeply and personally animated by a strong anti-immigration sentiment that unites their thinking across previously distinct and separate policy areas," the report observes.
https://www.businessinsider.com/84-percent-trump-voters-worry-discrimination-whites-christianity-under-attack-2021-10

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2021, 05:33:27 am »
Quote
Social dominance theory (SDT) is a social psychological theory of intergroup relations that examines the caste-like features[1] of group-based social hierarchies, and how these hierarchies remain stable and perpetuate themselves.[2] According to the theory, group-based inequalities are maintained through three primary mechanisms: institutional discrimination, aggregated individual discrimination, and behavioral asymmetry. The theory proposes that widely shared cultural ideologies (“legitimizing myths”) provide the moral and intellectual justification for these intergroup behaviors[3] by serving to disguise privilege as “normal”
[...]
A primary assumption in social dominance theory (SDT) is that racism, sexism, nationalism, and classism are all manifestations of the same human disposition to form group-based social hierarchies.[13] The social tiers described by multiple theories of stratification become organized into hierarchies due to forces that SDT believes are best explained in evolutionary psychology to offer high survival value.[14] Human social hierarchies are seen to consist of a hegemonic group at the top and negative reference groups at the bottom.[15]
[...]
SDT believes that decisions and behaviors of individuals and groups can be better understood by examining the “myths” that guide and motivate them. Legitimizing myths are consensually held values, attitudes, beliefs, stereotypes, conspiracy theories,[23] and cultural ideologies. Examples include the inalienable rights of man, divine right of kings, the protestant work ethic, and national myths.[24][20] In current society, such legitimizing myths or narratives are communicated through platforms like social media, television shows, and films, and are investigated using a variety of methods including content analysis, semiotics, discourse analysis, and psychoanalysis. [25] The granularity of narrative extends from broad ideologies at the highest level to middle level personal myths (positive thinking of oneself as a successful smart dominant, or submissive inferior[26]), reaching the lowest level of behavioral scripts or schemas for particular dominant-submissive social situations.[27] Categories of myth include:

    paternalistic myths (the dominant hegemony serves society, looks after incapable minorities)
    reciprocal myths (suggestions that dominants and outgroups are actually equal)
    sacred myths (karma or divine right of kings as a religion-approved mandate to dominate others)[28]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_dominance_theory

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Economic factors have been used to explain why large US cities are even more segregated than they were during the Jim Crow days, despite legal barriers to integration being removed.
https://belonging.berkeley.edu/press-release-most-metros-us-have-become-more-segregated-1990
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/in-step-with-income-inequality-us-cities-more-geographically-segregated-than-ever-13050270/

But "racial/ethnic preferences" are also driving this. (Parental preference for school districts is typically painted as a primarily economic issue!)
Quote
White, Asian and Latino parents in New York City all express strong racial/ethnic preferences in where to send their kids to high school, according to a study just published in Sociology of Education. The study suggests that these preferences contribute substantially to school segregation in New York, which has one of the most racially segregated school systems in the country.

“Part of what’s going on is white parents living in a diverse city who don’t send their kids to Black neighborhood schools,” said study author Chantal Hailey, an assistant professor of sociology at The University of Texas at Austin. “But the choices and preferences of non-white parents also contribute to school racial and ethnic segregation.”
[...]
She found that when white, Asian and Latino parents were presented with the choice of otherwise similar schools that were majority Black, majority white, majority Latino or mixed, the racial/ethnic demographics directly influenced their preferences.

White parents rated the hypothetical majority white school highest, followed by the mixed school, then the majority Latino and Black schools. Asian parents, like their white peers, were also less willing to attend the majority Latino and Black schools. Latino parents preferred the majority Latino school, and most wanted to avoid the majority Black school. Black parents showed no statistically significant preference for any of the schools based on racial/ethnic composition.

The results of Hailey’s experiment were consistent with the real-world administrative data on family preference in the New York high schools. Controlling for numerous other school characteristics, white families were 97% less likely to rank majority Black schools first on their applications compared with majority white schools, and 84% less likely to rank majority Latino schools first. Asian families were 90% less likely to rank majority Black schools first and 45% less likely to rank majority Latino schools first. And Latino families were 67% less likely to rank majority Black schools first on their applications compared with majority Latino schools.
https://news.utexas.edu/2022/01/07/racial-demographics-influence-school-choices-for-white-asian-and-latino-parents-finds-study-of-nyc-school-preferences/

Also, as we know, children are less racist than adults:
Quote
Hailey’s study also queried eighth grade students to see whether their racial/ethnic preferences aligned with or diverged from their parents’. She found that there were substantial differences, particularly in the degree of aversion to the majority Black school.

White students, for instance, preferred the majority white school but were half as averse to the majority Black school as their parents. White eighth graders also did not distinguish between their preferences for the majority Latino, majority Black and mixed schools.

Latino parents and their children preferred the majority Latino school, but the parents rated the majority Black school as least desirable. Their kids did not distinguish between their willingness to attend the majority white, majority Black and mixed schools.

"Black" students don't want to put up with constant racist bullying?
Quote
Black parents did not show any strong preference for schools by their racial/ethnic composition. Black students, on the other hand, expressed less willingness to attend the majority white school compared with the majority Black, mixed, and majority Latino schools.

The most Westernized "minority":
Quote
There were no statistically significant differences between Asian parents’ and students’ school preferences based on their racial/ethnic composition.


See also:
Quote
Schelling's model of segregation is an agent-based model developed by economist Thomas Schelling.[1][2] Schelling's model does not include outside factors that place pressure on agents to segregate such as Jim Crow laws in the United States, but Schelling's work does demonstrate that having people with "mild" in-group preference towards their own group could still lead to a highly segregated society via de facto segregation.[3][4][5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schelling%27s_model_of_segregation

Run a simulation of this here:
Quote
Racial segregation has always been a pernicious social problem in the United States. Many factors have contributed to segregation including prejudice, zoning laws, housing discrimination, and loan discrimination. Although much effort has been extended to desegregate our schools, churches, and neighborhoods, the US continues to remain segregated by race and economic lines.

In 1971, the American economist Thomas Schelling created an agent-based model that suggested inadvertent behavior might also contribute to segregation. His model of segregation showed that even when individuals (or "agents") didn't mind being surrounded or living by agents of a different race or economic background, they would still choose to segregate themselves from other agents over time! Although the model is quite simple, it provides a fascinating look at how individuals might self-segregate, even when they have no explicit desire to do so.
http://nifty.stanford.edu/2014/mccown-schelling-model-segregation/


JFK and Hitler recognized the solution to tribalism: statism.

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Quote
Study: Trump fans are much angrier about housing assistance when they see an image of a black man

In contrast, Clinton supporters seemed relatively unmoved by racial cues.

All it takes to reduce support for housing assistance among Donald Trump supporters is exposure to an image of a black man.

That’s the takeaway from a new study by researchers Matthew Luttig, Christopher Federico, and Howard Lavine, set to be published in Research & Politics. In a randomized survey experiment, the trio of researchers exposed respondents to images of either a white or black man. They found that when exposed to the image of a black man, white Trump supporters were less likely to back a federal mortgage aid program. Favorability toward Trump was a key measure for how strong this effect was.

The study is just the latest to show that racial attitudes are a powerful predictor for support for Trump — and the newest to suggest that such attitudes play a major role in Americans’ views toward public policy. Previous studies have found that racial resentment was a much stronger indicator of support for Trump than views about the economy. And other research has shown that priming people to think about race can make them more conservative on a host of issues.
[...]
“Support for Donald Trump — not partisanship or ideology — uniquely captures distinct reactions to our experimental manipulation of race,” they conclude. “That is, support for Donald Trump appears to serve as a basis for polarized responses to racial cues in its own regard.”
[...]
A lot of studies show racial attitudes are a big deal in US politics

The most straightforward research in this area looks at how views on race influenced support for Trump.

One paper, published in January by political scientists Brian Schaffner, Matthew MacWilliams, and Tatishe Nteta, found that voters’ measures of sexism and racism correlated much more closely with support for Trump than economic dissatisfaction after controlling for factors like partisanship and political ideology.



And one telling study, conducted by researchers Brenda Major, Alison Blodorn, and Gregory Major Blascovich shortly before the election, found that if people who strongly identified as white were told that nonwhite groups will outnumber white people in 2042, they became more likely to support Trump. That suggested that there’s a big racial element to support for Trump.
[...]
As researchers Sean McElwee and Jason McDaniel explained for Vox, racial attitudes are a very strong predictor for beliefs about government spending. “For decades, social scientists have found that attitudes about race, particularly toward African Americans, persistently impact political attitudes and opinions toward government services, spending, and welfare,” they wrote.

McElwee and McDaniel measured racial resentment, economic peril, and support for more government spending. They found that higher measured racial resentment correlated with a preference for decreased government spending and services, while more economic insecurity appeared to correlate — but not at a statistically significant level — with more support for increased government spending.


https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/9/8/16270040/trump-clinton-supporters-racist

Check out that second image. Higher "economic anxiety" actually correlates to lower "racial resentment"! (Although the author says the trend of "economic peril" is not statistically significant, so, in other words, its trend is technically neutral based on their statistical calculations)

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Quote
the choice of otherwise similar schools that were majority Black, majority white, majority Latino or mixed

Quote
Asian parents, like their white peers, were also less willing to attend the majority Latino and Black schools.

But not the majority "white" school! They are Eurocentrists.

Quote
Latino parents preferred the majority Latino school, and most wanted to avoid the majority Black school.

But not the majority "white" school! They are Eurocentrists also.

Quote
Black parents showed no statistically significant preference for any of the schools based on racial/ethnic composition.

They are behaving as Americans are supposed to behave.

Quote
white families were 97% less likely to rank majority Black schools first on their applications compared with majority white schools, and 84% less likely to rank majority Latino schools first. Asian families were 90% less likely to rank majority Black schools first and 45% less likely to rank majority Latino schools first. And Latino families were 67% less likely to rank majority Black schools first on their applications compared with majority Latino schools.

97% of "white" bloodlines, 90% of "Asian" bloodlines and 67% of "Latino" bloodlines in the US must be prohibited from reproducing in order for the US to become 100% American.

Quote
Black students, on the other hand, expressed less willingness to attend the majority white school compared with the majority Black, mixed, and majority Latino schools.

The parents are concerned with behaving individually as Americans should behave, but the students are the ones who have a sense of America on the societal scale:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/true-left-breakthrough-anti-whiteness-476/

On the other hand, the correct response is not to run away from "whites", but to get as close to them as possible:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/demographic-blueshift/msg3298/#msg3298

Quote
It is literally no different than grappling someone who is holding a handgun. The worst response is to try to run away. You will get shot if you do. Your best chance is to disarm the opponent or at least keep the opponent unable to point the gun at you while you call for additional help.