Educational Failure: Racism or Misogyny

Progressives bemoan the fact that black students perform way below average on educational tests, and offer these results as evidence of “systemic racism” in American society. Nevertheless, could low educational failure be the result of black culture rather than racism? If you search online for "rap music misogyny," you will find that misogyny, an extreme form of sexism, is a major element in the music that reflects the cultural ideal of many young black men.

The article in Wikipedia states that "Misogny in rap music refers to lyrics, videos or other aspects of rap music that support, glorify, justify, or normalize the objectification, exploitation, or victimization of women." According to the article women are routinely referred to as "bitches" and "hos" who can be used and discarded. Is it racism or culture that makes many black men ignore or even abandon their children? Black commentators routinely deplore the fact that so many black children are born out of wedlock, and grow up without fathers.   

Biologists tell us that  there is only one race: the human race. Historians tell us that the good, the bad and the ugly can be found in all of us. No matter what the color of our skin we all have brains that are more powerful than the most advanced computers. Why do some fail and others succeed in education and in life. Why, for example, do children of Asian immigrants do so well in school while black students fall behind from day one. A young Asian scholar has described a "success sequence" of education, a job, marriage, and children that if not followed usually leads to failure in life. 

Wendy Wang

In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal two years ago, Wendy Wang, the Director of Research at the Institute for Family Studies, argued that there is a “sequence” that must be followed to achieve success in rising out of poverty. The sequence begins with education, at least a high school diploma, followed by a job, and only then marriage and children. There will be exceptions but her research shows that failure to follow this sequence results in a high probability of a life of poverty or worse. In other words, if children come before marriage, work, and education the results are disastrous.

Wang cited statistics concerning so-called millennials from a study that tracked young adults from their teenage years to early adulthood. Of those who failed to follow the “sequence”, 53% were in poverty. The rate dropped to 31% for those who had at least a high school diploma, and 16% for those with a full-time job. Finally, the poverty rate dropped to 3% for those who held off having children until married.

Interestingly, the success sequence worked extremely well for young adults from low income backgrounds. “Eighty percent of those with lower income backgrounds made it into middle or upper income brackets when they followed all three steps.” Missing one of the steps or putting them out of sequence, like having children before marriage, led to a very high probability of failure.

Ms. Wang cited her own Asian background. In the small Chinese city in which she grew up there were practically no childbirths before marriage. It was unthinkable. Today in China, Japan, and South Korea the out of wedlock birthrate is only 4%. Compare that rate to America’s urban centers where the out of wedlock births often exceed children born to married couples.

I know a young white woman with a degree in elementary education from a fine college who started her teaching career as a first grade teacher in a Bridgeport school made up largely of black and hispanic children. Her college degree could not have prepared her for the chaos she encountered on her first day. Every day presented new pathological personal and social behaviors, and these were only first graders. In many ways, first grade is pivotal for it is then that the mind is ready to learn how to read. If the opportunity is missed, students will inevitably fall behind and never catch up.

Sadly and significantly, the teacher told me that on Parent’s Night, only four parents showed up to hear about their child’s progress. Maybe parent is the wrong word because most of these Bridgeport first graders didn’t have parents. They were being raised by grandparents some of whom were not even in their forties. Sometimes even great-grandparents were the caregivers for these children. Moreover, in most cases there were no men involved in the raising of these children. 

No amount of money will rectify the tremendous social disaster that has taken place in American cities in the past few generations. Unwed teenage pregnancies create an almost impossible educational problem. To get an education certificate today, teachers have to take courses that would almost qualify them as master psychologists. 

Even the best teachers will not be able to overcome this cultural disaster. There is a high probability that the parentless first grader will come to regard school as a prison and even before he or she gets to eight grade they will likely be attacking classmates and teachers, and destroying school property. Next, the probability is also very high that they will join a street gang, become a drug addict or dealer, and eventually wind up in jail or dead on the street.

Some will argue that Ms. Wang’s “sequence” success formula of education, work, marriage, and children is old fashioned. Actually, the success formula she finds in Asia was once the norm in the USA, especially among that generation that we now fondly recall as the “greatest generation.” Some may also argue that just getting an education and a job is sufficient for success, and that marriage and children are no longer necessary. However, another news article indicated that there is an epidemic of loneliness and depression sweeping over the country today that seems to indicate that love and marriage are still part of the success sequence.

###

Hall of Shame 2020

I have been holding off on nominations for this year’s Hall of Shame even though there are numerous candidates. But Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York has just earned an early nomination. In his speech at the virtual Democratic National convention, he blamed the Trump administration for its handling of the coronavirus. What can we make of this charge coming as it does from the man whose state leads the nation by far in coronavirus deaths?

As of August 19 there have been almost 5.5 million reported cases of coronavirus in the USA and 175119 deaths have resulted. A little over 3% of the reported cases have resulted in death. Another way to look at it is to say that there have been 529 deaths per million in the USA.

In New York State, there have been 457000 reported cases that have resulted in a nation leading 32932 deaths so far, a figure that far exceeds New Jersey which comes in second with 16030 deaths. The number of deaths in New York is more than the combined totals of California, Texas, and Florida, the three most populous states in the country. Even after the recent surge California has only 292 deaths per million, Texas 355, and Florida 455. Although the virus has apparently run its course in New York, Governor Cuomo’s state has an astounding 1693 deaths per million.

I have tried to avoid blaming politicians for what I consider a natural disaster and it will take months if not years to sort out what really worked and what did not work. Nevertheless, when politicians start blaming each other, they become fair game themselves. As I’ve said before, if Donald Trump had been governor of New York and achieved the same results as Governor Cuomo, he would have been impeached months ago. 

Moreover, has Governor Cuomo forgotten how quickly President Trump acted to provide New York city with a hospital ship and the transformation of the Javits center into a hospital during the height of the crisis? Back then even Democratic governors like Gavin Newsome of California praised the President for his quick action. 

It is clear that Democratic politicians mean to make the coronavirus a major issue in this year’s Presidential race. They will continually point to the death toll which now exceeds 175000 but fail to point out that about 50000 deaths have been recorded in New York and New Jersey, both Democratic strongholds. 

They will also point out that the USA leads the world in cases and deaths but fail to point out that the percentage of deaths in the USA is much better than in other countries. The 175000 deaths in the USA is about 3% of the total reported cases. In countries with national health systems like the United Kingdom and Italy, the death rate is over 12%. Of course, we have no way of knowing what the full impact of the coronavirus has been in China where the Communist government has obviously been withholding information. 

There must be a psychological term for what Governor Cuomo and other Democratic politicians are doing to deflect attention from their own guilt and mismanagement and blame others. It is hard to believe that a Governor whose state was on the verge of bankruptcy even before the pandemic, and whose medical system was woefully inadequate has been praised as a hero by his supporters.

Moreover, New York city is now undergoing a virtually unchecked epidemic of burnings, lootings, and shootings that are unprecedented even in its history. Even if the Governor will not take the blame for what has happened there, he does have it in his power to remove Mayor Bill De Blasio, the incompetent ideologue who has brought the once great city to its knees.   

###

Systemic Racism or Black Culture?

Last week a couple of letters in the Wall Street Journal argued that high rates of incarceration of black men in American prisons, and low test scores of black children in American schools were evidence of "systemic racism" in American society. I will deal with the education issue in a subsequent post but for now would just like to address the prison issue by reproducing a post from 2017 that seems just as relevant today.

***

Recently I was invited to speak on Renaissance art at the monthly meeting of a local MENSA chapter. The organization is made up of very smart people whose IQs place them in the top 2% when it comes to intelligence. The intelligence of the self-admitted “geeks” was certainly in evidence at the dinner that proceeded my talk. Discussion at the table was spirited and lively and ranged over a variety of subjects. 

These were interesting people and it was a pleasure to just sit back and listen. Politics was generally avoided but one man at the table brought up a book on racial injustice that sparked a little argument.  Although only halfway through the book, he was apparently already convinced of its validity. The book was “The New Jim Crow” by Michelle Alexander. Its subtitle, “Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness,” is more indicative of its subject. 

Published in 2012 the book soon made the NY Times bestseller list and was even required reading for the incoming class at Ivy League Brown University. Indeed, the San Francisco Chronicle called the book the “bible of a social movement.” Apparently the book claims that the incarceration of millions of black men in America is proof that racism is alive and well despite any claims to the contrary.

Fortunately, one of the other members at the table turned out to be well-read on the subject and brought up some very good objections based on his own reading. Later, he sent me a link to a very critical review article, entitled, “Revisiting ‘The New Jim Crow,’ written by John P. Walters and David W. Murray.  Here is a link to the review article that appeared on the Hudson Institute website. The reviewers quoted from the book’s dust jacket:

By targeting black men through the War on Drugs, and decimating communities of color, the U.S. criminal justice system functions as a contemporary system of racial control—relegating millions to permanent second-class status.” 

Walters and Murray refute this thesis, and take issue with the statistics offered to support what amounts to a conspiracy theory. They dispute the author’s assertion that “arrests and convictions for drug offenses—not violent crime—have propelled mass incarceration” by first noting the data for state prisons.

In state prisons, holding the largest number of incarcerated inmates, only 16 percent are drug offenders—54 percent of those incarcerated are violent offenders. 

They also explain that racism is not the reason why drug offenders make up almost 50 percent of the federal prison population. They note that the substantially smaller federal system “focuses on major domestic and international traffickers—34 percent of the federal prison population is Hispanic and 23 percent are not U.S. citizens.”

In short the authors of the review show that “The New Jim Crow” misuses statistics and even leaves out important evidence that does not support its thesis. Instead they argue that conduct and culture have more to do with rates of incarceration than racism. They point to the case of a black man from Mississippi who the book claims “cannot vote because he, like many black men in the United States, has been labeled a felon, and is currently on parole.”

It is true that Mississippi does deny voting to those who have been convicted of serious crimes from murder and rape to forgery and embezzlement. The man in question was indicted for the shooting of a 17-year-old boy; escaped from prison while awaiting trial; and was subsequently arrested and labeled a fugitive wanted for a capital crime. He was extradited and then convicted of murder. Somehow, he was later released on parole but cannot vote “not because he is black, but because he killed someone…”

The reviewers cite New York City Police Commissioner William Bratton who pointed out that blacks and Hispanics “represent half of our city’s population, but 96.9 percent of those who are shot, and 97.6 percent of those who commit the shootings.” I suspect that the same figures hold in other major cities including my own neighboring city of Bridgeport, Connecticut.

Recently I read an article in the Wall Street Journal by Jason Reilly, a black writer who is one of the Journal’s regular columnists. He also argued that conduct and culture have more to do with the problems of black Americans today than racism. In particular, he dismissed those who persistently bemoan the effects of slavery 150 years after its abolition. He pointed to the tremendous strides that blacks made in America in the 100 years after the Civil War. During those years statistics and experience show, for example, that black incomes rose at the same rates as whites and that black family formation was comparable to white. Despite persistent racist attitudes especially in Hollywood, blacks made substantial progress. Interestingly, two of last year’s top movies, “Hidden Figures” and “Fences”, illustrate that black families had made it into the middle class. 

If racism is to blame for a disproportion number of black inmates in American prisons, does it also explain the explain the racial imbalance in American sports today? Why is the preponderance of black athletes on professional basketball and football teams not racist? Isn’t it ironic that the black professional athletes who protest during the playing of the national anthem will all make millions during their playing careers? Despite their own success these athletes want to believe or need to believe in a very revealing myth of victimization.

###

Coronavirus Treatment

                                                

Back in March on the advice of my science advisor, I put up a post on coronavirus antidotes that included a reference to doctors that had been using a combination of the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine and the Z-pac to successfully treat patients with severe symptoms of coronavirus infection.

At the time the treatment, despite its success, was controversial. Although hydroxychloroquine had been used successfully for many years in treating malaria and lupus, it had not been tested for coronavirus. The now famous Dr. Fauci explained that the CDC could not support the use of the drug until it had been fully tested. Moreover, the drug could have serious side effects for those with heart and other conditions.

The drug became even more controversial when President Trump at a press conference alluded to the success that doctors in the field were having with the hydroxychloroquine treatment. Commentators were up in arms. The President’s support meant that the drug entered the political arena.

However, a study has just been published by the respected Henry Ford Health center in Detroit that shows the effectiveness of low-cost hydroxychloroquine in saving lives. It should convince Dr. Fauci although it will not persuade those who cannot believe that President Trump can be right about anything. ** 

Here is the headline from the July 2 press release of the study, “a large-scale retrospective analysis of 2,541 patients hospitalized between March 10 and May 2, 2020 across the system’s six hospitals”: *

DETROIT--Treatment with hydroxychloroquine cut the death rate significantly in sick patients hospitalized with COVID-19--and without heart-related side-effects, according to a new study published by the Henry Ford Health System.

The following quotes from the press release illustrate the study’s methodology and conclusions. (quotes in italics).

The study found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine alone died compared to 26.4% not treated with hydroxychloroquine. None of the patients had documented serious heart abnormalities; however, patients were monitored for a heart condition routinely pointed to as a reason to avoid the drug as a treatment for COVID-19.

Patients treated with hydroxychloroquine at Henry Ford met specific protocol criteria as outlined by the hospital system’s Division of Infectious Diseases. The vast majority received the drug soon after admission; 82% within 24 hours and 91% within 48 hours of admission. All patients in the study were 18 or over with a median age of 64 years; 51% were men and 56% African American.

"The findings have been highly analyzed and peer-reviewed,” said Dr. Marcus Zervos, division head of Infectious Disease for Henry Ford Health System... “We attribute our findings that differ from other studies to early treatment, and part of a combination of interventions that were done in supportive care of patients, including careful cardiac monitoring. Our dosing also differed from other studies not showing a benefit of the drug. And other studies are either not peer reviewed, have limited numbers of patients, different patient populations or other differences from our patients.”

Our analysis shows that using hydroxychloroquine helped save lives,” said neurosurgeon Dr. Steven Kalkanis, CEO, Henry Ford Medical Group and Senior Vice President and Chief Academic Officer of Henry Ford Health System. “As doctors and scientists, we look to the data for insight. And the data here is clear that there was benefit to using the drug as a treatment for sick, hospitalized patients.”

Speaking of saving lives, last week a group of doctors held a press conference at the Nation’s Capital to describe how they had used the hydroxychloroquine treatment to save lives in the hospitals in which they worked. One was impassioned in claiming that no one has to die from the coronavirus. She claimed that she had treated 350 patients with severe symptoms and none of them had died. Her remarks went viral with over 17 million hits but were taken down by media outlets like You Tube which claimed that the brief video did not meet its community standards. 

The Henry Ford Health Center study has received little attention in the media. Everyone wanted a study back at the outset of the pandemic but when one appears that contains good news, it is ignored. It would appear that there are many people who not only can’t believe a study that shows good results but who actually do not want to believe it no matter what its scientific bonafides.

It is too bad that doctors actually saving lives are censored. I have heard that doctors in hospitals take hydroxychloroquine as a prophylactic but keep it secret for fear of ostracism. The other day I heard a TV commentator refer to health officials who recommended the drug as "killers."

The doctors’ strategy could actually help schools to reopen in the Fall. I don’t mean that children should take hydroxychloroquine. Their immune systems handle the virus easily and they are at virtually no risk of being infected. But their teachers, especially the older ones, could routinely take the inexpensive medication as a precaution.  

###

*The study was published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, the peer-reviewed, open-access online publication of the International Society of Infectious Diseases (ISID.org).

** If you click on the link to the Henry Ford Health center study, you will find that it comes with a warning label as if it is dangerous to read.