Racism

Americans Want Racial Diversity More Than Ever Before

People are increasingly tolerant of racial differences.

|

From protests inspired by the police murder of George Floyd, to the 1619 project at The New York Times, to battles over curricula inspired by controversial "anti-racism" ideology, the United States seems to be at a moment of reckoning over race relations. And yet, while there's no question that racially charged conflicts have spread across the country, it's not at all obvious that Americans are especially racist today. If you compare headlines with polling data, it looks like politicians, activists, and the media are ginning up racial disagreements even as people become increasingly accepting of those from different backgrounds.

"I think one of the sticking points that I've found is this sort of predominance of white people saying, 'I'm not racist,' and the predominance of people of color saying 'I can't be racist,' and it creates this environment in which we have racism, but every individual is claiming that it's not them," Ibram X. Kendi, an author of books asserting widespread racism, told a recent Harvard University gathering

"An Alabama state school board member said protesters may be 'terrorists' at a Thursday meeting, amid ongoing controversy over topics of race and racism in education," noted AL.com last week.

All is not well in race relations among Americans, according to news stories. And yet, when you ask people how they feel about neighbors from different backgrounds, you get a very different result.

"In many places – including Singapore, New Zealand, the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and Taiwan – at least eight-in-ten describe where they live as benefiting from people of different ethnic groups, religions and races," Pew Research finds in polling results published October 13. Specifically, 86 percent of Americans "say that having people of many ethnic groups, religions and races makes their society a better place to live." That's a bit less than the 92 percent of Singaporeans who say the same, identical to results from Canada, and far above the 45 percent of Greeks and 39 percent of Japanese who agree. Support for diversity across the countries surveyed averages 76 percent.

Can we be sure Americans aren't just mouthing empty platitudes about tolerance? Other survey results suggest that our countrymen mean what they say.

"Ninety-four percent of U.S. adults now approve of marriages between Black people and White people, up from 87% in the prior reading from 2013," Gallup found last month. "The current figure marks a new high in Gallup's trend, which spans more than six decades. Just 4% approved when Gallup first asked the question in 1958."

Intermarriage isn't the be-all and end-all for assessing good will between groups, but it's a pretty good proxy. Marriage is an intimate relationship that tends to push people's hot buttons. And questions about intermarriage have been asked of Americans for more than 60 years, giving us a consistent measure of shifting attitudes. Importantly, approval of intermarriage is nearly identical (within the margin of error) for white and non-white adults, and above 90 percent across age groups and regions.

So, with all of this kumbaya, are Americans just blind to disagreements around them? No, people are all too aware of the headlines.

"When it comes to perceived political and ethnic conflicts, no public is more divided than Americans: 90% say there are conflicts between people who support different political parties and 71% say the same when it comes to ethnic and racial groups," Pew adds.

Note, though, that being aware of battles doesn't mean that people want to pick fights with their neighbors—it's an indication that they follow the news. They're acknowledging conflicts (which, in the cases of school curricula and the 1619 Project are about framing race relations rather than actual interactions), not cheering them on. Also, racial conflicts don't lead the pack in polling results.

"In most societies racial and ethnic divisions are not seen as the most salient cleavage," Pew observes. "In the U.S. and South Korea, 90% say there are at least strong conflicts between those who support different parties – including around half or more in each country who say these conflicts are very strong."

Americans overwhelmingly approve of interracial marriage, but don't feel the same about crossing partisan boundaries.

"According to the latest Economist/YouGov Poll, 38 percent of Democrats and 38 percent of Republicans said they would feel somewhat or very upset at the prospect of their child marrying someone from the opposite party," according to a 2020 survey. Political divisions weigh far more heavily than race.

That doesn't mean that America's racial problems have been solved and we can just drop the issue. When members of a group take to the streets to voice common concerns about disparate treatment by police and the criminal justice system, we should listen. That was certainly the case with last year's protests over George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and other African-Americans on the receiving end of law enforcement's often brutal conduct. A society's institutions need to treat people equally—equally well, not poorly, we hope.

There also are still actual racists catering to old fears with garbage like "replacement theory" which holds that white Americans will be pushed aside by people from other backgrounds. It's a hateful message that plays to lingering obsessions with group identities.

But we should acknowledge that Americans observing conflicts around them have the highest level of tolerance for one another on record. Participants in protests over racially charged curricula are themselves drawn from the least racist generation of Americans so far. There's still progress to be made, but this country has come a very long way since the days when only 4 percent of the population approved of marriage between black people and white people and such relationships were illegal.

The racial conflicts grabbing headlines are largely about the behavior of government officials and activists, and coverage by the media. Protests over police conduct were about the state's enforcement apparatus. Protests over public school curricula are about how government-employed educators teach about race relations. The 1619 Project and classroom battles are fueled by activists who are heavily invested in an ideology that emphasizes racial differences to a public losing interest in those divisions. The media, at least at the elite level, is strongly sympathetic to those activists. And politicians get mileage out of amplifying the country's political conflicts with racial concerns.

Americans are less divided than ever before by race, but too many prominent people regret that progress.

NEXT: Biden Reverses Trump's Showerhead Deregulation

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The best response I've seen to whether racism is a problem in the US is turning the question around and asking yourself if the average person would choose, if they could, to be a healthy black man or a 300lb white man. That's the level that racism is at in America, somewhere below the social distaste for fat people.

    1. Ok, now do the same question but ask if you would rather be gay or crippled.

      1. Is that crippled from birth or like that butthole Christopher Reeves?

        1. No live fetal stem cells for you!

        2. Deathtrap was spectacular.

          1. Somewhere in Time was pretty good too.

            1. by decree of S.O. we are not allowed to pass on Somewhere in Time in our house when it's on

              1. I am making a good salary online from home .I’ve made 97,999 dollar’s so for the last 5 months working online and I’m a full time student .DEc I’m using an online business opprtgortunity. I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

                For more detail … READ MORE

        3. Christopher Reece the super butthole

          1. *Reeve

        4. Butthole? Any specific reason you are disparaging him? I don't recall him having a bad reputation before his traumatic quadriplegia. He was a tireless advocate for the handicapped until his death.

      2. The 'to be a lesbian, you'd have to be a woman' conundrum is indeed a tough choice.

        1. Not so. There are plenty of men who claim to Lesbians trapped in a man's body.

          1. "In most societies racial and ethnic divisions are not seen as the most salient cleavage,"

            Hey, people of every heritage can like salty breasteses!

          2. People trapped in other people's bodies? Just abort 'em I say.

            1. These people are quite viable and sapient with pruient thoughts, so no dice.

              1. I'm gonna need to see proof that the trapped individual is viable without depending on or even consuming the host.

                1. *Assumes Johnny Carson voice to explain the joke!* Ya see, the lesbian woman and the horndog Hetero man like the same thing, so much so...

                  Audience: How much do they like the same thing?

                  Johnny: ...So much so, that they are in fact one in the same person...And as Carnac would say: "May your figs never have the 'Sell By' date of your analogies."

                  Ed McMahon: HO!-HO!-HO!-HO! YEASSSS!

    2. this is a reply in general-I think people answered the survey questions the way they thought they should be answered.Wait until Devonte and
      Shaniqua move in next door...they'll be singing a different tune.
      Or the job you are so obviously qualified for goes to a less than competent "ethnic."
      There is something to be said for relatively homogeneous societies.

      1. "People are increasingly tolerant of racial minorities."
        Which is approved, so long as they are not tolerant of the racial majority.

  2. As is the case with many 'problems', this is amplified by the democratic party as another excuse for government edicts.
    Fascists got to do fascism.

    Homework:
    Go read through the entire democratic party platform, and count the number of references to race, sex, gender, where policies are specific to only one group. The definition of negative discrimination.

    1. Oh yes, you're just oh so oppressed.

      1. Nobody really is.

      2. It's funny how you have to purposefully miss the point in order to avoid the reality of the situation.

      3. Oh yes, you are so full of shit.

      4. I think his remark was meant to point out the divisiveness of the democrat platform. Before Obama people didn't give two shits about someone's race. Hell can you remember hardcore music, you know, when all those gangster rappers and metal bands were doing tons of projects together? The dems couldn't have that, then people might focus on the bullshit they were trying to sneak by us.

    2. I was at a wine tasting years ago with Carlo Rossi, maker of widely sold cheap wine in Napa. He said that if people like a wine, then drink it, but don't spend all their time talking about it.
      Racial diversity in the US is mostly like that. I am part Klickitat, Mexican, Scot, English, and German. No one ever had any of my ancestors take a survey. They just met someone and had kids.
      The objections about 1619 and CRT are ones of blame and excuses for future failures, not inclusion.

  3. But did you ask the news media? Or the activists who need something to do? Look harder or just freakin' make something up. Come on man!!!!?

    Brandon could find it.

    1. “Poor kids are just as smart as white kids.”
      SleepyJoe

      1. Poor kids are largely stupid. Ask any teacher after you've bought them 4 or 5 drinks.

        1. On that, I was talking to a few teachers, the topic was voting. This community is very progressive. I should not have been surprised, but am still disgusted that the idea that voting should be mandatory, with a financial penalty for failure to vote, was espoused. The Reason staffer who claimed that libertarians and progressives share goals and ideals is full of shit. Progressives are cryptototalitarians.

          1. Progressives are cryptototalitarians...minus the crypto part.

            1. It’s a lot easier to just say (or type) ‘evil’.

  4. From a Koch / Reason libertarian perspective, increasing racial diversity is important in two major ways. First, it expands our benefactor Charles Koch's supply of cost-effective labor; Mr. Koch has found that Black and Brown immigrants (especially Mexicans) are simply willing to accept lower wages than US-born workers. Second, it helps Democrats win elections, which is also desirable now that Democrats are officially the pro-billionaire party.

    #DiversityAboveAll

    1. Excellent point! Jennifer Rubin and Bill Kristol both celebrated America's increasing racial diversity on Twitter when it was reported that America is more rapidly becoming a non-white country. However, they both cautioned that there was a potential for white minority rule unless we secure our voting rights by eliminating any checks on voter identification.

      1. Have you ever noticed that staunchly pro-Israel / pro-Iraq War American Jews are pretty much the only conservatives who have retained their respectability over the past 5 years? IIRC Jennifer Rubin even had "friend of Israel" right there in her Twitter bio for the longest time. And of course Kristol wrote an entire book demanding a US invasion of Iraq.

        Indeed, the GOP made a severe blunder by forcing out Rubin and Kristol and Boot and Frum. But at least they're comfortable in their new home in the Democratic Party.

        #LibertariansForABetterGOP
        #PutTheNeoconsBackInCharge

    2. It's the koch lover who thinks all labor should be scarce and costly!

  5. Ultimately, the government has no business trying to control what people believe. The legitimate purpose of government is to protect our rights. and there isn't anything appropriate about the government trying to control what people believe. When we argue over what other people should believe and to what extent it needs
    to be controlled, without making that point, we're carrying water for what amounts to totalitarianism. And by the way, that's one of the distinctions between authoritarianism and totalitarianism.

    Authoritarians are generally content with the government controlling what we do, but totalitarians insist on controlling what we think and how we feel. Libertarians are supposed to be fundamentally opposed to both of them on principle regardless of their efficacy or necessity. The only legitimate purpose of government is to protect our right to make choices for ourselves, and libertarian opposition to thought control isn't about arguing whether that's really necessary. It's about fundamentally opposing what amounts to thought control on principle.

    1. Yes, this is a very important point. I find racism as distasteful as anyone. But people are allowed to have bad thoughts and believe wrong things. Government has no business being concerned with whether or not people are racist.
      I like how Thomas Sowell often puts it. Racism is just an idea in people's minds. And people will usually act in their economic self interest and racial discrimination gets in the way of that.

      1. Except that beliefs are not merely individual. They are social - where pressures to conform then turn into acceptance of eliminating basic rights, immunities, privileges of those on the receiving end of what become group hatreds.

        1. Like anti vaxxers?

        2. Sure, that's true as far as it goes. And if white supremacy were actually a driving force in our culture, that might be something to worry about. But it's pretty much the opposite of that. For decades there has been enormous social pressure against racism and bigotry. There is no significant movement to take anyone's basic rights away on the basis of race or ethnicity and hasn't been for a very long time.
          Sadly, the neo-racists of the radical left seem to want to undo all that progress.

          1. But but but TRUMP!

            To this day I still don't have the foggiest idea why supposedly rational people continue to equate MAGA with Racist. I mean...I know why they do...painting your political opponent as inherently evil is a great way to keep your base together. But as the rational argument that gives this belief weight ... *shrug*.

            1. He made those nasty comments about Mexicans. That's all I can think of. It's pretty silly, but racism is what they decided to go with. And it seems to have worked.

              1. He also made the "fine people on both sides" comment about Charlottesville. And he defends Confederate monuments. And there are people welcomed at MAGA events wearing "Camp Auschwitz" shirts, waving Confederate flags, and yelling "Jews will not replace us".

                But I'm sure all that is perfectly innocent. There's no racism on the far right.

                1. Any more NYT lies you want to add to your list?

                2. I’m sure everything you just threadshitted is absolutely true.

                3. You left out the giant slingshot that antifa was using to bomb protesters with shit, piss, and mace. Have you ever noticed that when that retard ran his vehicle into that crowd, the video shows that they were armed with clubs. But, I wouldn't expect you to believe your lying eyes.

        3. "Except that beliefs are not merely individual. They are social"

          This is absurd, and free societies have individuals who fail to conform--which is why free societies are always changing.

          Being a hippie, or gay, or a metal head, or a Mormon, or in a mixed marriage, or a socialist, etc., etc., etc. used to make you an outsider, and some of them still do you make you an outsider. Some of those things have become widely accepted and part of the new norm, and the government doesn't need to be in control of how people think or feel about any of that in order for norms to change. We've more than capable of becoming tolerant on our own.

          1. P.S. The reason society is more tolerant of LGBTQI+ today than they were 50 years ago has almost nothing to do with government and a lot to do with David Bowie, Freddie Mercury, Elton John, and Boy George.

            1. But Tipper Gore told me rock and/or roll was bad for children and should be censored.

              1. Yeah. It makes them gay.

                1. No. But it makes some men crazy. And then they talk like fools. It makes some men crazy. And then they start to drool.
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sns9kKLRQv4

              2. But progressives told me orange man bad and should be censored...and Twitter/Facebook/Google complied.

                1. Boy, that conflates a lot of things.

                  First of all, Orange Man is bad.

                  Second, he shouldn’t be censored (by the government).

                  Third, those social media companies are private businesses, not the government.

                  1. They are not private by any definition.

                  2. Yeah, they are the government, but only the democrat part.

            2. And Little Richard, as if anyone didn't know.

        4. Which basic rights have been eliminated?

          1. Speech, privacy, self defense.

        5. Except that beliefs are not merely individual.

          Prove there exists a social belief that isn't held by individuals.

          1. That claim he made is absurd.

    2. During the past 50 years of listening to debates about racism, I've found that the most racist people in America are the left wing activists, organizations and politicians who have repeatedly and falsely accused others (usually conservatives, libertarians and/or Republicans) of being "racists".

      Notice how none of the left wing activists who advocate for "racial equity" (by claiming every organization and profession that is dominated by whites is racist) have criticized the NBA, WNBA or NFL of being racist (because there are far higher percentage of blacks).

      Truth and honesty are the real victims when the wealthiest blacks in the history of the world publicly accuse America of being systemically racist.

      Its even worse when the most racist political party in the US (which was founded to preserve slavery, started the civil war, sabotaged reconstruction, created and enforced Jim Crow laws via the KKK for many decades, rounded up hundreds of thousands of Japanese Americans, and destroyed black families with massive entitlements from Big Brother) continues to falsely accuse the GOP (which fought to free the slaves, and end Jim Crow) of being racists.

    3. Well said, Ken.

      I *loathe* Reason's "American Culture Wants X", bullshit. It's anti-individual, anti-libertarian groupthink/newspeak. People who decide to date someone from another race because they think America needs more diversity should be ridiculed and excoriated every bit as much as anyone who thinks they should date someone from the same race because America needs more racial purity.

    4. "The only legitimate purpose of government is to protect our right to make choices for ourselves"

      But . . . you might make the wrong choice and we can't have that!

      1. Right? But with SB8 and a conservative Supreme Court at least one of those "let people decide for themselves" things will be over soon.

  6. If people love them some racial diversity they will soon be disappointed because the species is moving in the opposite direction. Every generation is less black, less white and has fewer ethnic distinctions. The concept of race should be behind us by now.

    1. Yup. Some people just can't let it go. It's too useful of a tool to keep people divided and blacks voting for Democrats.

      1. Exactly; you might recall some chatter in 2008 about living in a "post racial society" immediately following Obama's election; about that time notions like "white privilege" starting coming of of some sociologists closet from the 80s. Having overwhelmingly elected a black president, we had to bee deemed racist by default, and then come to terms with unconscious bias and other snake oil in order to keep the divisiveness running. It is just too valuable as a cudgel and political too to give up that easy. Or as Michelle Obama put it, "I cannot see why any Black American would not vote straight Democratic ticket."

      2. "What else am I suspossed to be hustling fo'?"

        -The Reverend Jesse Jackson

  7. Diversity is useless. It literally means nothing .

      1. Kind of an ignorant notion.

          1. Whoosh, I suppose

          2. You injected race into the conversation, not mick. I say that you are the racist since race seems to be at the forefront of your thoughts.

      2. United we fall, Diversity we....drip into goo and become communist drone slaves.

      3. Diversity of thought is our strength.

    1. Akin to gay rights, it's the idea you have when you've run out of (or want to ignore/divert attention from) actual ideas.

      1. Well, LGBTQ+ people do exist and they do have individual rights that exist too. So, where is the shiny thingie distraction here?

        1. So, where is the shiny thingie distraction here?

          Prove a distinction between gay rights and human rights.

          1. There is no distinction, but both the Religious Right and National Conservatives at home and Islamofascists abroad want that distinction to be 100 percent, with zero percent rights for LGBTQ+ individuals. (And zero individual rights for anyone else except the "right" to obey God's Viceroies on Earth.)

            1. You are full of your own shit. You paint people with a broad brush and I don't think it has anything to do your real personal beliefs. I think you are the perfect example of someone who uses virtue signaling as a way to try and elevate yourself above others, but have yet to realize that you are only engaging in mental ejaculation.

              1. Sooo...show me your sheepskin in Psychoanalysis, not that it makes a damn.

                1. Show me yours and I'll show you mine. You just engaged in your own psychoanalysis of an entire group of people you don't even know. At least one can glean from your comments what mind set they are dealing with. And to act as if someone has to prove that they should possess credentials just to call you out and then state that wouldn't make a damn anyway only solidifies my statement.

                  P.S. I aced psychology.

        2. Do LGBTQ(rest of the alphabet) have additional or less rights than everyone else? Please provide references.

    2. Not so. It is a hedge against risks arising from monoculture.

  8. It shouldn't be want or don't want. It should be accept or not accept.

  9. Wow...just in. Colin Powell died. A consequential figure in American history. To me, his apex was Desert Storm. I will never forget his briefing before hostilities: First will will cut it off, and then we will kill it (referring to Iraq's Kuwait invasion force). The Desert Storm campaign was something else.

    Baruch Dayan Ha'Emet: Colin Powell. May your soul be bound up with the bonds of eternal life.

    1. He lied for the Bush II administration about WMD in Iraq and sent thousands of young men off to be maimed and killed. He's a shitbag and if he had a conscience, he would have resigned instead of continuing on with America's greatest folly, so far, of the 21st century.

      1. Fuck Colin Powell. And Joe Biden.

    2. He stopped DS after 100 hours of the ground war. Two more days would have seen Saddam being driven from power and the replacement government formed from the less radical polity at the time. Instead we get US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, leading to Al Qaeda's formation, leading to 9/11, leading to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

      1. Right. Because taking over Iraq would have worked so much better if we had done it earlier. And it wouldn't have created any of the same resentment.

        Your neocon fantasy would have been just as disastrous for us as what actually happened in Iraq. It just would have happened earlier.

    3. What others said below. Colin Powell was a flunkie for The Little Bush Boy who got thousands of U.S. Armed Service Members and hundreds of thousands of civilians senselessly killed.

      And save your breath; he didn't have a soul any more than anyone else, but he, like everyone else, did have a mind and he should have used it.

      1. Rather, same with others on this thread, not necessarily below. I didn't realize where my post would go.

  10. There seems to be a rather influential portion of the "progressive" intellectual class that are pushing a frankly racially deterministic ideology which makes collective judgments in people. The fact that most Americans have bought into a more egalitarian viewpoint personally, makes them find that ideology offensive and personally insulting.

    We have a seemingly controlling portion of our elites that have open contempt for large swathes of the American public, and American culture as it has stood. Those elites raise the stakes by having a fondness for criminalizing dissent from their worldview.

    1. Do you mean people in fly-over country or do you mean deplorables?

  11. Diversity means nothing. The best hockey team is almost entirely white. The best basketball team is almost entirely black. Japanese society is pretty non-diverse yet they have great achievements.

    It means absolutely nothing other than a virtue signaling opportunity

  12. Polling like that isn't the end all be all. How many say "interracial marriage is fine" because they know they "should" say that but wouldn't want their son/daughter marrying someone of another race?

    It's no different than "sure, the transit system is a good thing. Let's just keep making sure it ends at the city limits though." Racism and prejudice can't be measured by a simple "can people marry" question.

    1. Cool it with the anti-Semitism! Israel doesn't allow marriages between Jews and goyim but it unfortunately does recognize foreign marriages (e.g. non Jewish weddings performed in Cyprus). Our people are being genocided when we don't marry our own tribe!

      1. It also recognizes same-sex marriages from abroad. Is that "genocide" too?

        And is the U.S. policy of having civil marriages distinct from religious ones "genocide" too?

        You do this troll thing quite well, I must say.

    2. “People’s thoughts aren’t pure enough for me”.
      Dingleberrydinners

      1. "I assume I know people's thoughts"

        -Every prog, everywhere

        1. This, right here.

    3. Yes, how many say that? Can you give us a number?

    4. Or maybe 90% of Americans mean what they say, and aren't race obsessed psychos.

    5. Funny that all these leftists seem to know multiple examples of everyone being against inter-racial couples despite it being widely accepted and celebrated.

      Almost like a perfect projection of their race obsession and racism

      1. Did you know Clarence Thomas married a white woman? I'm not mentioning this because of racism, but because it I feel Thomas would have dissented in the Loving v. Virginia case. And my feelings are valid.

        /prog

        1. The most stunning moment of the Clarence Thomas hearings happened when he was asked, "what reason could Angela Davis possibly have for making false accusations? He answered that Ms. Davis was upset about his preference for white women.

    6. Sure: why let data stand in the way of believing whatever you want to without any data whatsoever?

      If they can't prove your confirmation bias is faulty, hold on to it, tightly! Never let go!

      1. Most of you probably realize this, but Raspberry Dinners is pretty obviously a Tony sock; a lot of these started popping up right about the time the "mute" button appeared.

        1. I kind of always assumed. But Raspberry Dinners is more calmly snarky than Tony. Tony, when pushed, gets really weird and creepy.

          1. Right, that is more Roberta sock than RD. Either way it's still Tony whining for a real "troll" to come along and pay his bills so he can live a permanent Summer vacation. In exchange for services, or course.

    7. I always love how people, both on the left and the right instantly pivot to conspiracy theories every time a poll comes out that goes against their desired narrative.

    8. >>Racism and prejudice can’t be measured

      exactly.

    9. Something approaching 20 percent of marriages in the U.S. are "interracial," so there's that too. Perhaps the reason they aren't more could be an aversion to marriage of any kind. Like the Musk-Mobile, marriage in general does have an over 50/50 shot of blowing up on the roadside.

  13. Normal people aren't obsessed with race? This is big news.

  14. "take to the streets to voice common concerns about"

    ...not enough buildings unburnt, and not enough stores unlooted.

  15. Diversity is the opposite of community.

  16. Progressive reproductive couple: "Yes, we are hoping our gender-fluid offspring will engage in a long term sustainable relationship with at least one multi-racial POC. But if they brings home a MAGA sympathizer, they will be dead to us."

    Diversity!

  17. People want diversity in everything except thought.

    1. People want diversity in everything except thought.

      1. Damn straight!

        1. From a steaming pile of lefty shit.

          1. Has no idea how many people have put him on the ignore list...

  18. The problem with diversity and racism is really an in ability to cap the extremist. The Republican party seems to reluctant to put an end to obvious racists win it ranks. This was obvious when regular party members were reluctant to put an end to suggestions that Barrack Obama and Kamala Harris are not citizens. Opposite of this is the ultra woke latte liberals who find racism present all too easily. Liberals and Conservatives both need crisis teams to put out fires when people at the extremes threaten diversity through racist remarks or calling racism too quickly.

    CRT and 1619 are merely prospective ways of looking at Law and History. They are not the threat to diversity that some people want to make them out to be.

    1. obvious...yeah. uh huh.

    2. What are they supposed to do, kill them?

      I think that in general, the right is a lot better at excluding the extremes than the left is. It is quite rightly unacceptable to publicly espouse white supremacist views, for example. Yet somehow it is largely acceptable on the left going around promoting communism or racist nonsense.

      1. The only way you can honestly say that the right is controlling the extremes and the left isn't is if it is Opposite Day or Bizarro World.

        Right now AOC, Bernie, and the lunatic fringe on the left are being held in check by the moderates. But Jim Jordan, Ron Johnson, Steve King, Josh Hawley, MTG, Matt Gaetz, and their fellow travelers crushed the moderates on the right and are the power in the GOP.

        If we want a well-functioning country, we need to banish the wingnuts to the wings and leave them there. The middle 80% shouldn't be held hostage by the 10% on each fringe of American politics.

        1. "Right now AOC, Bernie, and the lunatic fringe on the left are being held in check by the moderates. "

          Yeah, so many moderates. You mean Manchin and Sinema, which is 2 out of 50, or 4%? Maybe you're just pathetic?

        2. Typical lefty inability to think in proportions. Moderates are very obviously outliers in the Democratic party, not a common occurrence. And the frequency at which we see them is obviously decreasing, certainly not constant.

    3. Wait, who was it that started the Obama birtherism thing again? That's right. Maybe the whole issue was predicated on gaining political power than based on racism.

    4. The Republican party seems to reluctant to put an end to obvious racists win it ranks.

      Now do the Democrats' anti-semitism in their far-left ranks.

      Opposite of this is the ultra woke latte liberals who find racism present all too easily.

      There's a reason for that.

    5. CRT and 1619 are merely prospective ways of looking at Law and History.

      They're lies.

      1. They are not lies than is silly. They are merely prospectives to examine history. What about them is a lie, can you explain you silly statement?

        1. They're lies, asshole.

          1. My response to moderation is awaiting moderation. Funny.

    6. Origins of the [BIRTHER} claims; Wikipedia

      Conspiracy theories about Obama's religion appeared at least as early as his 2004 U.S. Senate campaign in a press release by Illinois political candidate Andy Martin,[38] and, according to a Los Angeles Times editorial, as Internet rumors.[39]

      From the start of March 2008, rumors that Obama was born in Kenya before being flown to Hawaii were spread on conservative websites, with the suggestion that this would disqualify Obama from the presidency.[40] In April of that year, some supporters of Hillary Clinton circulated anonymous chain emails repeating the same rumor;[41] among them was an Iowa campaign volunteer, who was fired when the story emerged.[42][43] These and numerous other chain e-mails during the subsequent presidential election circulated false rumors about Obama's origin, religion, and birth certificate.[44][45]

      On June 9, 2008, Jim Geraghty of the conservative website National Review Online suggested that Obama release his birth certificate.[46][47] Geraghty wrote that releasing his birth certificate could debunk several false rumors circulating on the Internet, namely: that his middle name was originally Muhammad rather than Hussein; that his mother had originally named him "Barry" rather than "Barack"; and that Barack Obama Sr. was not his biological father, as well as the rumor that Barack Obama was not a natural-born citizen.[47][48][49]

      In August 2008, Philip J. Berg, a former member of the Democratic State Committee of Pennsylvania, brought an unsuccessful lawsuit against Obama, which alleged "that Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya."[50][51]

      In October 2008, an NPR article referred to "Kenyan-born" Senator Barack Obama.[52] Also that month, anonymous e-mails circulated claiming that the Associated Press (AP) had reported Obama was "Kenyan-Born".[53] The claims were based on an AP story that had appeared five years earlier in a Kenyan publication, The Standard.[53][54] The rumor-checking website Snopes.com found that the headline and lead-in sentence describing Obama as born in Kenya and misspelling his first name had been added by the Kenyan newspaper, and did not appear in the story issued by the AP or in any other contemporary newspaper that picked up the AP story.[53][55]

      In 2012, the far-right website Breitbart published a copy of a promotional booklet that Obama's literary agency, Acton & Dystel, printed in 1991 (and later posted to their website, in a biography in place until April 2007) which misidentified Obama's birthplace and states that Obama was "born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii". When this was posted by Breitbart, the booklet's editor said that this incorrect information had been her mistake, not based on anything provided to her agency by Obama.[56]

      A simple and brief visit to Wikipedia might have shown you to clean your own house first, Reverend Mod.

      1. I am not interested in a complete history of the birtherism. What I am speaking about is a reluctance on the part of Republicans to stand up to racism. All the Republicans had to do was say birtherism was wrong and Obama was a citizen and was President. When candidate Trump said Mexicans were rapists all Republican had to say was he was wrong. All evil needs to flourish is for good people to stay quiet and I think the Republicans do this too often with racists.

        In a similar way that liberals too often let people be beaten down on social media for things that are far less serious than they are portrayed.

        1. So bothsiderism. Got it.

          You are as blue as the day is long and it comes through loud and clear. Just stop pretending otherwise and I for one would find it easier to respect your position [instead of engaging in the duplicity of being open minded].

      2. More interesting than raised in kansas and Skokie, amirite?

    7. Everything in this post is completely wrong. Probably intentionally so.

      1. Copypasta from Wikipedia [as admitted]; I honestly did not have the time to vet any of it, but it has been my understanding that Broom Hilda was much more involved than there just being some volunteers and one paid staffer who got canned. Regardless I certainly don't recall her doing much if anything to refute it.

        Point is is was not just a Republican conspiracy, so why does it fall on them to go out of there way to refute it?

  19. people are people there are no races. the rest is gaslighting.

    1. Race in the classic anthropological sense does not exist. Instead we are all fine gradiations of features based on historical migrations and mixings. However there is race in terms of legal classifications and as well as culture. The former needs to be done away with, and the latter will fade away when that happens.

      Why was Obama called our first Black president when his mom was as White as the Mayflower? Under the matrilineal rule, why is he not considered White? Or at least mixed race? My best friend in elementary school was Asian, he married a Latino, they adopted a Black baby. What race is the baby? Why does it matter? They're one family. The extended family is just as mixed. Why should anyone care?

      1. if everyone would calm down about melanin there would be peace.

      2. Why was Obama called our first Black president when his mom was as White as the Mayflower?

        He grew up white. He had to marry Chewbacca to learn how to be black.

        1. Yeah, Obama was a privileged white kid who happened to have an African father.

          1. Yeah, I also think it's laughable when Kamela is advertised as black when she's obviously mixed.

    2. Race is simply a rough indicator about where your ancestors lived. Take the populations of Ireland and Nigera and swap them. Come back 500 years later. Think the Irish are still pasty white?

      1. 500 years, if they get to keep some modern conveniences. I bet they will probably still be white.

        1. And drunk.

      2. Take it back farther and you would see that we are all Africans. Our DNA tells us that we are all descended from the first humans in Africa. Race is not so much the difference between cats and dogs as it is bulldogs and greyhounds.

  20. A mix race couple was shocking in 1971. Fifty years later in 2021 it doesn't even raise an eyebrow. We have made tremendous progress. Doesn't mean racism doesn't exist, it still does. The we need some acknowledgment that progress has been made.

    The remaining pockets of racism are in government, from local police departments on up to congress. The left needs to stop focusing on comedians making off color jokes and start focusing on how government perpetuates racial inequality. But government is too sacred of a cow for the left to skewer.

    1. the public employee unions are supporting the leftist politicians, which prevents them from cleaning up police departments or taking administrative action against bad cops in cities run by leftist politicians.

      1. Leftist politicians are ... preventing people from taking action against bad cops? I thought leftist politicians were too active against cops, good or bad.

        You need to make up your mind whether leftists hate cops or protect them.

  21. There are two very different race issues being conflated that shouldn’t be, individual and cultural.

    Tolerance of individuals from different racial backgrounds is easy. Their behaviour is measured like everyone else’s.

    Tolerance of different cultures is much more difficult if not impossible. The very nature of culture is to be different from others through spiritual beliefs like religion to practiced behaviour like customs and norms. These do not always mix well with others.

    The idea of multiculturalism doesn’t work in practice. We simply end up with cultural enclaves within our communities where outsiders can visit to trade but can’t stay.

    As immigrants move in to established communities in sufficient numbers to take over they do and the native inhabitants are slowly pushed out.

    If that’s tolerance, fill your boots.

    1. "The idea of multiculturalism doesn’t work in practice. "

      What has worked better? Take American music, a rich mix of influences of many cultures that has spread throughout the world. The idea that multiculturalism in music 'doesn't work' is ludicrous.

      1. Miser is nothing more than an idiot.

      2. What has worked better?

        The actual American idea-- 'e pluribus unum' the 'melting pot'.

        That is what created the American music you cite.

        It is why we have things that are intricate weavings of cultural influences rather that what 'multiculturalism demands--which is a strict adherence to and separation of different cultures that exist in the same place.

        Under multiculturalism you KEEP your culture and tolerate the different cultures of others.

        Under the American idea, your culture is alloyed with and into all the cultures of all the people who decide to become Americans.

        One foments harmony as a greater whole is forged from disparate pieces.

        The other is a tool wielded to create interracial and cultural strife.

        1. Multiculturalism first arose in Canada as a result of Ukrainians opposing the long standing anglo/franco biculturalism that dominated political discourse. It's not the nefarious plot you make it out to be.

          1. trueman is posting here in the hopes that someone makes a mistake and clicks on his handle, which will double the clicks on his blog this week.

            mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
            "Spouting nonsense is an end in itself."

            trueman is full of shit, and nothing else. Fuck off and die, asshole.

    2. You know who else said the equivalent of "Fill your boots?"

      Great News: New Black Panther Party Calls To Create "Red Sea" of "Bloodshed"
      https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/04/09/great-news-new-black-panthers-calls-to-create-red-sea-of-bloodshed-n684552

      Sounds like you've got company, Misek.

      Of course, in a Libertarian society, the only "suit up" that Race Warriors would be doing is in an orange jumpsuit and the only "boot up" they'll be doing is a boot up the ass from the rest of who want to be left alone in peace and freedom.

  22. "Americans are less divided than ever before by race"

    They are divided by politics. Which often translates to division by race. Last year's election results in Georgia and the Black migration there should make this clear.

    1. trueman is posting here in the hopes that someone makes a mistake and clicks on his handle, which will double the clicks on his blog this week.

      mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
      “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

      trueman is full of shit, and nothing else. Fuck off and die, asshole.

  23. "There also are still actual racists catering to old fears with garbage like "replacement theory" which holds that white Americans will be pushed aside by people from other backgrounds. It's a hateful message that plays to lingering obsessions with group identities."

    "Also those" as in Reverend Kirkland who has promulgated this deceit here a number of times.

    1. Some writers claim that America will have a 'majority minority' population by the year 2040. Like Mike Gonzalez, author of The Plot to Change America: How Identity Politics Is Dividing the Land of the Free.

      http://library.lol/main/59E10657677DDBD9F27B77300DBD1C77

      1. trueman is posting here in the hopes that someone makes a mistake and clicks on his handle, which will double the clicks on his blog this week.

        mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
        “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

        trueman is full of shit, and nothing else. Fuck off and die, asshole.

    2. Well I must say, college students everywhere will be most relieved to hear that they will not be displaced from prestigious universities so that lesser qualified applicants can be taken in, strictly in the name of diversity.

    3. Wait, you don't think replacement theory is racist/white supremacist bullshit?

      1. Hello new guy. We have a hard leftist and self-proclaimed democratic partisan named Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland here, whose every second post will contain a reference to America becoming "less white" and "replacements" taking place and all sorts of oral rape fantasies (he likes phrases like "against your will"). Meanwhile, white can be used as a derogatory term in the media in a socially acceptable way now. You must be from California. But let me tell you, to unprogrammed human beings, such rhetoric is concerning.

    4. Youre talking about black women?

      Fucking racist

  24. The 1619 Project has created, fostered and caused more harm than any intended good. There have been documented historical inaccuracies that have been ignored and the NYT has been caustic and condescending to the slightest pier critical review.

    Teach accurate history,all perspectives, " warts and all ", with the goal being to treat EVERYONE of ALL races by the content of their hearts and not the color of their skin.

    I still reject, 36 years later, Congressman/ Impeached Federal Judge Alce Hasty statement to me that " I was white and I need to be quiet and accept that only white people are racist ".

    1. Teach accurate history,all perspectives, ” warts and all “, with the goal being to treat EVERYONE of ALL races by the content of their hearts and not the color of their skin.

      Fuck you. Teach history accurately, the guesswork about the content of men's hearts through the lens of history is *the* problem.

      1. Grr...
        Teach accurate history,all perspectives, ” warts and all “, with the goal being to treat EVERYONE of ALL races by the content of their hearts and not the color of their skin.

        1. Don't assume that racism is only an evil of white people. There have been eras of " No German", " No Irish ", " No Italian "No Chinese, No Japanese as well as No Black.

          Western Europe didn't invent slavery. Slavery is based upon the word " Slav". Slavery was present in antiquity, Greek, Roman, Africa Nations, and the Arab world before the Atlantic slavery trade. Western Europe traders didn't go into the continent to find slaves. They went to the existing slave markets already established in African cities and nations.
          Slavery in any form is condemned and wrong. Slavery is still present today in China, arab countries and in parts of Africa. Racism is wrong regardless of a person's race.

          1. I said nothing about whites or slavery. Recording and teaching facts as written is hard enough. Only The Shadow knows what lurks in the hearts of men, for the rest of us, it's fertile ground for, if not itself, revision.

            1. I quoted MLK Jr. And your response was "FU ". Nice classy response. Sorry I misinterpreted your troupe.

            2. I referred to a MLK Jr. quote...

          2. The dahome were happy to sell of all their men for European weaponry.

  25. People were much more racist 50 years ago. We just didn't have facebook and twitter.

    1. Agreed. That doesn't mean we aren't racist now.

      1. A certain degree of racism is as normal as corona, and fearful, defeated, mollycoddled dead ends of evolution will have to learn to live with both or continue to whine, lose and vanish.

  26. I don't see how you can miss this.

    Since Obama was elected in 2008, the Democrats and particularly the progressive movement has been desperate because their number one issue got neutered.

    Every news story was about a post racial America. They needed their issue back.

    Activists have always been working to foment racism. Grifters like Al Sharpton have worked to increase racial divides and then exploit them. But something changed after Obama got elected.

    Obama mouthed the platitudes .. but look at actions. "Could have been my son" and lecturing a cop about being sensitive to a wealthy black professor who was breaking into his own home yelling racist insults at him.... These were early signs... But "hands up, don't shoot" was the giveaway.

    Nationally coordinated activist groups were clearly working to increase racial divides. The plan was obvious and consistent... To choose ambiguous cases and push them hard, entirely based on race. BLM showed up at St Louis based on a lie... And Obama knew the lie within 48 hours, minimum. But the DOJ threatened local officials into silence for several long weeks, allowing BLM to build a national network.

    They spent the entire Trump presidency pushing racism everywhere, all the time. And almost always in ways that are inexcusable.

    Kendi et.al. are not trying to cure racism. They are trying to create racism out of whole cloth.

    Don't take my word for it... Just listen to their own words. They are old-school Marxists. They have updated the language to include race, but the game plan is still to disrupt and divide until society is broken down and destroyed so they can remake it.

    Stop pretending that any of these people are sincere when they talk about "conversations about race" or any of that nonsense. They want to push past what people will tolerate so they can create a backlash. They want a white counter-attack based on race so they can gin up genuine animus.

    Stop engaging on their terms. Go back to Martin Luther King Jr. and call these people out. They are openly racist, and clearly lying. Any answer other than that is simply participating in the destruction. They are not serious about "anti racism"... It is a parody meant to divide. Stop playing their game, call them out everywhere, all the time.

    It cannot start with a programmer at Google. He will be crushed. It must be people in the press, calling out every aspect of this mission to destroy society by fomenting a new racism. It must be too level Democrats growing a conscience... And most of all, we need left wing black leaders who are not communists to come forward and fight racism on the left. Nobody on the right can do this.

    But no libertarian should ever write another think price using their language and following their premise.

    1. >>Go back to Martin Luther King Jr. and call these people out.

      this.

    2. I've reacbed the point where anytime I hear someone say: "let's have a conversation," I know they are interested in much more than that. They want a conversation that is only in favor of their dogma and anh "diversity" they want is not of ideas. Real conversations start naturally around a common topic or theme to which all parties have some relation and with allowance for give-and-take.

      1. I’ve reacbed the point where anytime I hear someone say: “let’s have a conversation,” I know they are interested in much more than that.

        "I am, and always have been, single."

    3. You forgot about the part where the left framed all opposition to Obama's leftist policies as racist, as if conservatives would have supported these leftist policies were the Democrat president white.

    4. Yes, well said. It's kind of hard to avoid sometimes, though. The language has been creeping into our culture for some time now.

    5. They have updated the language to include race, but the game plan is still to disrupt and divide until society is broken down and destroyed so they can remake it.

      Remaking it is not the plan. Some may think it's the plan, but as has been seen, whether you fail to remake it, just discriminate against the next minority down (or up) the ladder, or both, remaking it without discriminating against *anyone* is not a/the plan.

  27. Surrender

    “So, what do you mean that you’re a racist in the right way?”
    “The right way is paved with hard truth and inescapable consequences. The hard truth? The strong, scientific evidence confirming the obvious ... differences among the races. A truth that reflects the biological consequence of tiny differences in genotype generating huge differences in phenotype.”
    “Differences aside, would you vote for a ... uh, Negro ... for President?”
    “For the right Negro ... yes, of course. Political behavior is one thing ... reproductive another. In that regard, another truth is that I’m not in favor of miscegenation. I believe that European Caucasians, who represent Western civilization and currently are under genetic attack, are worth saving. Dark, you see, is dominant over light. Negroid traits, for example, are dominant over Caucasoid traits genetically. Does one drop of black ink in a glass of clear water color it genetically? Yes. White Europeans invented modern civilization. Given current trends, in a few generations, they will have become extinct as a consequence of their suicidal behavior reflecting an antipathy toward their own reproduction and a wishful fantasy of a harmonious world populated by a single, homogenized race. Their fantasy reflects a consequence that never will happen. What will happen is that European Caucasians will cease to exist. Orientals will become dominant ... and that’s the truth.”
    “I’m Oriental.”
    “Yes, you are ... and because you’re Mongoloid, and I’m Caucasoid, the consequence of our racial difference is that we can be friends, perhaps good friends, but nothing more ... and that’s another truth!”
    “Do you favor outlawing miscegenation again?”
    “No, because I also believe in freedom of association ... and the right to be wrong.”

    -Excerpt from the novel, Inescapable Consequences

    1. Spare us your free plug of The Turner Diaries II: Beyond Thunderdome. I don't want your crap and the bulk of us prolly don't either!

  28. But ... But ... But ... Muh iNsTyTuShUnUl rAcIsMz!!!!

  29. When you see a couple like this, and they end up having a child together, does it make for an awkward situation when everyone feels the need to say, "He's [or she] is so adorable" or "... so cute"? Do we really believe that? I have a feeling we aren't being truthful.

    1. If it's Beyonce we're being truthful.

      "Beyonce Giselle Knowles was born on September 4, 1981, in Houston, Texas, to Celestine "Tina" Knowles (née Beyonce), a hairdresser and salon owner, and Mathew Knowles, a Xerox sales manager....Mathew is African American, and Tina is Louisiana Creole"

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyonc%C3%A9#Early_life_and_career_beginnings

      1. OK, her mom is, in Census terms, also black. Also seems to have a fair share of white as well.

        1. If I were to check, I'd probably find a hot-and-heavy argument on Wikipedia about Mom's racial classification.

    2. Not any more than when it's a mono-racial couple and their kid is... uh... breathtaking.

      By and large, everyone else's kids are ugly.

      1. There is always someone that has to say, "yeah, but I saw one couple that were of the alabaster variety that has an ugly child." Always. That is supposed to prove what exactly? Is that to be the inverse of there was one time when someone actually those a couple like above had a pleasant look to them their offspring?

        1. Jesus, why can't Reason enable the edit feature?

    3. For me, it's truthful. Mother Nature doesn't make ugly babies in any shade or clime or kind.

      I greet and talk to every baby and little one I see in my store. And, yes, they still smile and respond happily to a friendly voice and smiling eyes even with a mask covering the mouth.

  30. "Bridge some of those cultural gaps...while doing the wild thing!"

    (Source: I saw this on the TV program In Living Color)

    1. "I'll rock yo' world!" --Wanda.

  31. The idea that approval of interracial marriage indicates a desire for multiculturalism and open borders is absurd.

    I'm happy for Joe and Chantelle's marriage; marriage is a good thing, more people should be engaging in it. That doesn't mean that I want neo-Marxists, Somali socialists, or illegal La Raza revolutionaries flooding the country.

    Tuccille apparently has bought into the racist concept that if you have a different skin color, you must have a different culture.

  32. Americans Want Racial Diversity More Than Ever Before
    People are increasingly tolerant of racial minorities.

    These two statements next to each other are unrelated. One is evidence that Americans are less racist. One nominally requires an increase in racism.

    1. Yeah, tolerance means putting up with something one doesn't like.

      We can get along better than that.

      1. We can get along better than that.

        Getting along better than tolerance means forcing other people what to think.

        1. No, there are people who are kind and loving to each other without some law forcing them to do so.

          Don't make me the optimist here, it's not a role I'm used to.

          1. No, there are people who are kind and loving to each other without some law forcing them to do so.

            There are people and things you *shouldn't* like. Maybe not because of the color, but not liking things isn't inherently bad. You can not tolerate or dislike genocide and still be optimistic that we'll never engage in it, or need to. Believing everyone else should feel the exact same way isn't optimism as much as foolishness.

            1. I was discussing this part of the headline specifically: "People are increasingly tolerant of racial minorities."

              Tolerance is the least common denominator attitude one can have across the "color line." "Oh, no, it's those people again. I really find them annoying.* But I'll keep my chin up and act cheerful."

              It's possible, without benefit of government, to apply non-racial criteria and actually *like* the people who meet the criteria. That still leaves plenty of room for legitimately disliking someone for *non-racial* reasons.

              *Southpark reference

              1. It’s possible, without benefit of government, to apply non-racial criteria and actually *like* the people who meet the criteria.

                It's possible, with or without the benefit of government, to apply racial criteria and *like* the people who meet the criteria (or don't). Lee (and, to a lesser degree, Lincoln) fretted about causing what Civil Rights leaders lamented a century later; a race of liberty-challenged co-dependents.

                And, yes, when the sentence is preceded by 'Americans Want...', least common denominator is what you're going go get. Optimistically, least invasive as well.

      2. I disagree. Tolerance can merely mean quiet acceptance of a thing-- whether that thing is different or likeable or nominally unlikeable.

        But "Wanting Racial Diversity More Than Ever Before" often means draconian policies which favor one race or skin color over another. It means making literally choosing someone due to their skin color, which means rejecting someone else due to their skin color.

        1. Although on further reflection, there is something to what you're saying. When one thinks of "tolerating" something, it's suggestive of living with a condition that's really irritating.

        2. “Wanting Racial Diversity More Than Ever Before”

          There's the part I don't care for.

          Like you say, it could mean pushing to have the racial "count" come out the right way.

          The more you take race into account in your public policy, diverse it gets.

        3. Tolerance can merely mean quiet acceptance of a thing– whether that thing is different or likeable or nominally unlikeable.

          It *can* mean that, but the defintion is neutral. Just like bias or discrimination. It simply means that you don't move to rid your life of it and, in a larger context may even incur more of it.

          I tolerate my kids better than I tolerate hangovers. Do I love my kids or alcohol more? Are my kids a headache-inducing nuissance or am I just really bad at dealing with hangovers?

  33. Americans want freedom of association. Full stop. History will pass by the holdouts.

    1. We know you Mormons like to discriminate against non-whites and non-Christians.

      1. I discriminate against idiots, progressives, and Democrats, regardless of skin color.

      2. The list of temples just announced this month:
        Kaohsiung, Taiwan
        Tacloban City, Philippines
        Monrovia, Liberia
        Kananga, Democratic Republic of the Congo
        Antananarivo, Madagascar
        Culiacán, México
        Vitória, Brazil
        La Paz, Bolivia
        Santiago West, Chile
        Fort Worth, Texas
        Cody, Wyoming
        Rexburg North, Idaho
        Heber Valley, Utah

        Only the 4 in the US are in a majority white regions. 3 are in Africa. There might be more in non-Christian countries except that so many of those forbid it by law. You just love to be wrong, don't you?

        1. I never said y’all won’t be take non-white suckers money. As long as you don’t have to live with them you’re all for having non-whites to help conquer the world.

          I’m sorry for the threats I made against you and your family. I try to be a good person. That’s my problem with Mormons. The vast majority are evil.

          1. There’s a shit ton of typos, so go ahead and ridicule me.

            At least I don’t financially support a racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic church.

            1. We dont need typos to ridicule you, SucksMormonDick loser 😀

        2. Rexburg is nothing but Mormons. I assume Heber Valley and Cody are too.

          1. Asshole gets three more flags. Fuck off and die, asshole.

            1. Sevo gets Buttigieg(I typed butthurt but it autocorrected to Buttigieg and made me laugh) when I point out he’s a pussy who can’t handle booze and has to whine about it to other losers.

              Poor senile Sevo

              1. Poor motherless, drug addicted, obsessed human misfire SucksMormonDick 😀

                1. What makes you think I’m a drug addict?

                  1. I'm not going to give you information on how non-sociopathic individuals can tell that you are a sick fuck. I will not equip you with information that makes you better at hiding it.

                    1. What makes you think I’m a sociopath?

                      I believe you have me confused with someone else.

                    2. Do you go to loser meetings like Sevo does?

          2. 3 responses without a single substantiated claim. I realize that is not close to your record, but it's still sad. 🙁

            And please do a moment's research before you vent your spleen.
            You should be assaulting the meetinghouses. Temples don't take in a penny. You like to call the church hypocrites, but they are way ahead of you on this one. Jesus had a thing or two to say on the topic.

            The additional temples in already heavily represented communities also does not speak to a racist church. White flight should mean less need for temples in UT, ID, WY and TX, not more.

            Now, please, ignore us the way you clearly ignore the CCP and Islam not allowing anyone to proselytize under threat of severe punishment or death.

            1. China and Radical Muslims are half a world away. Mormons are in my country.

              If their building temples it’s because the LDS population is growing or expected to grow in those places. More zombies to send on missions to trick and deceive fools out of their money.

              For a church that “loves everyone” all the Mormons I knew sure hated the gays and non-whites. I have not met every Mormon, but I’m quite confidant the majority are shit bag bigots.

              1. Even the ones who weren’t bigoted were still horrible human beings. That church gives its members a fucked up world view. The arrogance is just scary.

                1. Your whining is delicious, SucksMormonDick.

                  1. Thanks

              2. all the Mormons I knew sure hated the gays and non-whites

                Prejudice sees nothing but prejudice. Based on how often you imagine others speaking in racial pejoratives, I also sense a certain amount of projection. You will never be free until you let go of your fear.

  34. Being tolerant does not equate to wanting more.

  35. I'm white and I don't have kids - but many of my friends do. I'm 62 and many of my friends have adult children that are married to a person of color - usually black. This is just fine as far as I'm concerned. I grew up in the Midwest (Missouri), southern Indiana (across the river from Louisville), and southwest Florida. Most the places I've lived were very white - with the town in Indiana having a little higher percentage of blacks (and as most people might know - Louisville has a significant percentage of black residents). I guess that means that boomers like me - or at least the kids we're having - are responsible for the growing acceptance of mixed-race marriages. Identity politics is pretty silly given this reality.

    1. Identity politics is the result of your acceptance: Democrats we’re increasingly at risk of losing race as an issue to divide people.

  36. Diversity is a virtue only when it means black people...Asians, not so much.

  37. "Americans overwhelmingly approve of interracial marriage, but don't feel the same about crossing partisan boundaries."

    What does it mean to "approve" of this? It's not enough to just not care?

  38. All of this evidence, of course, is the reason anti-Racism, 1619, "systemic racism", microaggressions, unconscious bias, DEI, hate crime hoaxes, and other woke horseshit exists now: most Americans aren't racist and American society isn't racist. That's not good news if you're a professional race-baiter, er, I mean "activist."

    These ideas and concepts are pushed because there's little evidence individual White Americans are actually all that racist. The left needs to make it sound like Bull Connor, Jim Crow or the Confederacy is here. It just doesn't square with how people actually live and think, as evidenced by these polls. There are no fire hoses or police dogs on the news every night, either, so they have to make up something (often a hoax).

    There are, of course, actual virulent racists out there (of all races), but they're pretty damn marginalized and only exist on the fringes of society. The activists have to make up new ways of calling people racist, so they invent microaggressions, which aren't actually racist - they're just mundane interactions, but they pretend they are racist.

    Or they label all of society as "systemically racist" to completely remove any agency from folks they want to call racist when it suits them. It's so much easier to smear people as racists if you don't have to back it up with evidence, or when you can point to literally everything (racial or not) as disprovable evidence of racism.

    1619 Project? "Reimagining history" as a way to pin historic racist conduct on people who didn't do it to benefit folks who didn't suffer it. Does it matter that it's fiction? It should, or is that racist?

    Anti-racism literally calls for racial discrimination against white people. This label exists without a shred of irony. It's a total scam!

    All of this has an end, of course. Political power. By guilting dumb woke people into believe this nonsense, the left hopes to gain more power.

    1. "Very wise words! You live up to your name and to your lyrical namesake by Rick Derringer:

      "I Am A Real American"
      https://youtu.be/sPO5lbFnulE

  39. It's not really about diversity. About 80% of this is about quotas for black people. Thats it. Nothing can be too black to too final. But it can however be too white or too male.

  40. If you obsess about diversity and say you "want it more than ever", you are already a woke loser.

    1. By which I mean that normal people don't give a shit. And that's a good thing.

  41. I am making a good salary online from home .I’ve made 97,999 dollar’s so for the last 6 months working online and I’m a full time student .DEc I’m using an 0nline business opportunity. I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    For more detail … http://thefreedomjobnetwork.unaux.com/

  42. What a load of leftist nonsense. Leftists demonize and discriminate against white men constantly, but the only racists ever mentioned in the article are the boogeymen "white supremacists".

    Diversity is a racist religion created to discriminate against white men. There is no inherent benefit in more or less racial diversity -- this is nonsense created by leftists, and is self-evident to anyone who isn't indoctrinated. Have you ever seen white people included in "diversity". Have you ever seen someone complain about how basketball teams need to be more "diverse" by having more white people? What about diversity of thought? Will companies give affirmative action to conservatives so that their companies have more diversity? No, of course not -- on the contrary, those pesky right-wingers should never be included, they should be censored and canceled.

    Until people wake up and acknowledge the rampant and toxic racism on the left pervading our institutions, articles like this will never help to solve the racial divisions in our country. It will only serve to justify it.

    1. You left out your link bot.

  43. Racism will continue as long as politicians keep pointing out diversity and using diversity as a tool to separate and divide. The ultimate racism is telling one group of people they are victims, and another group of people they are oppressors. When you let someone else define you, box you in, put you in a slot, it limits your potential. That is racism. We should all be Americans, not diverse Americans.

    1. Well said.

  44. "racists catering to old fears with garbage like "replacement theory" which holds that white Americans will be pushed aside by people from other backgrounds."

    I'm sure there exists a racist theory and racists who cater to it.

    But also, many politicians and others literally have as their highest policy priority, the replacement of legacy Americans (who include many races btw) with new voters by legal and illegal immigration. We know that because they say so repeatedly. The new voters, they say, will be more open to their globalist socialist agenda. They won't have those highly irksome obsessions with things like liberty and individualism, and attachment to supposedly "archaic" notions of decentralized sovereign self-government from some guys around 250 years ago.

    1. Latino voters are not necessarily progressive. See Cubans in Florida. Immigrants from communist countries are in favor of a social safety net, but are virulently opposed to anything called 'socialism'.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/opinion/sunday/immigrants-vote-election-politics.html

      1. You're right. Just because they have these plans and intentions clearly laid out, doesn't mean that they're correct or that they'll be successful.

    2. "Legacy Americans."

      Fuck, straight from the lips of Tucker Carlson. Are you talking about Native Americans? I bet you're not!

      You're talking about immigrants and drawing an arbitrary line behind the boat they got off of.

  45. Why do you think the oligarchy is trotting out a desperate last grasp at a race panic? Without race panic, they have nothing.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.