January 30, 2006

Dynamics of a Smear

Hatched by Dafydd

I always find it wryly amusing, the mental gymnastics that liberals will undertake just to "prove" that conservatives are really just racists. Which, of course, they knew all along; so it's jolly convenient that their studies keep proving it over and over.

For example, when sociologists decide to investigate whether there is a correlation between supporting George W. Bush and harboring ill will towards blacks:

For their study, Nosek, Banaji and social psychologist Erik Thompson culled self-acknowledged views about blacks from nearly 130,000 whites, who volunteered online to participate in a widely used test of racial bias that measures the speed of people's associations between black or white faces and positive or negative words. The researchers examined correlations between explicit and implicit attitudes and voting behavior in all 435 congressional districts.

The analysis found that substantial majorities of Americans, liberals and conservatives, found it more difficult to associate black faces with positive concepts than white faces -- evidence of implicit bias. But districts that registered higher levels of bias systematically produced more votes for Bush.

The fallacy here is, naturally, the error of predetermined causality: is the correlation between Bush voters and people who find it "more difficult to associate black faces with positive concepts than white faces" due to innate racism? And if so, do racists just naturally tend to gravitate towards Bush?

Or could it be that when blacks learn that a Caucasian is a Republican, they direct such a torrent of hate and racial bigotry towards him that they virtually guarantee that he won't be able to associate his tormenters with "positive concepts?"

And what exactly constitutes a "positive concept" in the first place? Would the list include tolerance of those who believe differently, a belief that everyone should be treated equally regardless of race, and basic fairness? Why should we assume that every subculture in the United States is equally provisioned with these virtues?

If black leaders -- such as Harry Belafonte, Cynthia McKinney, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Barak Obama -- to the enthusisatic applause and cheering of ordinary, middle-class blacks, routinely show rampant and hysterical intolerance of anyone to their right; if they prattle incessantly about racial preferences and "reparations" for slavery; if bad employees who happen to be black constantly threaten an EEOC lawsuit whenever a company tries to let them go -- is it really a racist reaction for someone to have a hard time associating various "positive concepts" with blacks, given the recent history?

It's like showing pictures of Arab faces to Israeli Jews and concluding that the latter must be racially prejudiced, because they have a hard time associating "positive concepts" with Achmed, Ramzi, and Mohammed.

But if such wariness is a rational response, then this study shows only that districts that produce more Bush voters are likewise more rational; while districts that produce more Democratic voters are more likely to be living in a fantasy of cultural relativism, where every culture is equally good, and we cannot in fact even judge them except by their own terms.

For this to say anything about latent racism, we must first assume that Republicans have no more reason to be wary of blacks than do Democrats... which is of course patent nonsense: of course we do, because blacks are so much more likely to hate Republicans than Democrats (many blacks do not hate Democrats... they despise them, which is an altogether different emotional response, albeit no less ugly).

When prominent blacks make a point of not "hating Whitey," as David Horowitz titled a book he edited, then those blacks typically come under vicious attack by the civil-rights community as Uncle Toms and Aunt Jemimas -- and Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Larry Elderberry, Condoleezza Rice, and Michael Steel could all give you an earful about it.

I would bet that if the authors of this study were to ask the same questions of blacks, they would find an even larger percent of black Republicans who have a hard time associating those "positive concepts" with black faces. It would not, however, be "self-hatred" or prejudice, but rather post-judice: black Republicans have an enormous load of history to back up their angry reaction to most "brothers." How do you love someone who nakedly hates you?

But the Washington Post, which carried this article, wasted no opportunity to use the study as a stick to bash Republicans:

Jon Krosnick, a psychologist and political scientist at Stanford University, who independently assessed the studies, said it remains to be seen how significant the correlation is between racial bias and political affiliation....

"If anyone in Washington is skeptical about these findings, they are in denial," he said. "We have 50 years of evidence that racial prejudice predicts voting. Republicans are supported by whites with prejudice against blacks. If people say, 'This takes me aback,' they are ignoring a huge volume of research."

I'm sure... but how much is "research" like this study?

Hatched by Dafydd on this day, January 30, 2006, at the time of 11:29 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/448

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dynamics of a Smear:

» The “hidden biases” survey from Sister Toldjah
Yesterday in the thread I started about Rep. J.D. Hayworth’s (R-AZ-5th district) marvelous opinion piece on multiculturalism and assimilation, the comments section of that post got sidetracked when a commenter attacked the motivations and charac... [Read More]

Tracked on January 31, 2006 6:54 AM

» MORE ON THE CONSERVATIVES=RACISTS STUDY from Michelle Malkin
Yesterday, I mentioned the Washington Post's smelly little article on an unpublished study purporting to associate conservative support for President Bush with bias against blacks. Newsbusters' Tim Graham noted that the reporter who penned the piece ha... [Read More]

Tracked on January 31, 2006 7:21 AM

Comments

The following hissed in response by: napablogger

I totally agree with you, I wrote about this on my site, but basically these results could equally argue that Republicans are more honest about blacks. We don't know the images, but blacks are committing 50% of the violent crime and are 12% of the population. So if you look at a black image and associate it more often with crime, you are factually correct and that is not a bias.

The above hissed in response by: napablogger [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 1:08 AM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Napablogger:

But again, it's important to add that the determining factor here is not race but culture.

I read the Bell Curve, but I found the controversial argument less than compelling: I came up with a number of possible explanations for their black vs. white findings that Murray and Herrnstein do not seem to have considered; and I have a hard time believing that, if there were some African genetic component to, e.g., IQ, that an American black who is perhaps 1/8th or 1/16th African would show any perceptible effect of any but the most dominant gene... and it's hard to imagine a scenario where a gene for low IQ would have such an evolutionary advantage!

To me, the key is culture; Dinesh D'Souza's tour de force first book, the End of Racism, postulates that many of the black cultural behavior patterns that are so destructive today were actually survival mechanisms during the days of slavery, which so impacted black culture (even for black families that arrived here post-bellum).

That makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than any racial explanation, because of course even the lightest-skinned black with the most trivial percentage of African genetic heritage can consciously identify with, and therefore adopt, the culture. Look at black middle-class kids who fall into the so-called "gangsta" culture: that's a choice, not a destiny.

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 2:26 AM

The following hissed in response by: The Yell

I call on Prof. Krosnick to explain the curious effect of Bill Clinton on the "solid South". In 1988 Bush carried majorities in all 11 former Confederate states. In 1992 Clinton won TN, AR, GA, and LA. In 1996 he lost GA but added FL. In 2000 and 2004 "Dixie" went solidly to George Bush.

If bigotry explains election results, what happened in those southern states Clinton carried? Did he suddenly appear to be the candidate of white domination to GA in 1992, but not in 1996? Or did too many GA bigots migrate to Florida in those four years? Would Krosnick argue that bigotry failed to drive those states' results in the Clinton years? and if bigotry is not a constant factor, what evidence is there for its commanding role in 2000-2004?

To serious scientists such anamolies make or break a theory. But this is not real science.

The above hissed in response by: The Yell [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 2:35 AM

The following hissed in response by: Pat Curley

Larry Elderberry? I think you mean Larry Elder.

The above hissed in response by: Pat Curley [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 7:46 AM

The following hissed in response by: Steve Verdon

Elderberry? Who is he?

The above hissed in response by: Steve Verdon [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 9:36 AM

The following hissed in response by: Alec Rawls

Blacks vote 90% for the stinking Democrat party, which fights desperately against everything I believe in. Show me a picture of hippies, Volvo drivers, a Hollywood crowd, a feminist march, or any other of the recognizable types where by appearance alone I can be pretty certain the person is my political enemy, and I do not have positive reactions to that appearance. That doesn't mean I dislike all Democrats, but that association in itself is negative, and blacks in America have tied themselves overwhelmingly to that association. You think the idiot researchers would have considered that, since they were looking at political associations.

The above hissed in response by: Alec Rawls [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 11:29 AM

The following hissed in response by: RBMN

I have a hard time associating "positive concepts" with the majority of people living in the European country that my ancestors came from--the people I share my genes with. That country is so full of socialist lunatics that it makes me sick to think about. I'm so eternally grateful that my ancestors got the hell out.

The above hissed in response by: RBMN [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 3:15 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Pat Curley:

Larry Elderberry? I think you mean Larry Elder.

You have no idea how much I restrain my natural impulse not to call anything what it actually is, as a friend's girlfriend once put it. For example, I don't think I have ever referred, on this blog, to the 1996 Republican presidential nominee as Blob Dole. Well, I mean until now.

I make a point of not calling the well-known activist Jesse Jackass, or talking about Minority Leader Henry Reed (and his Democratic babysitting service).

Though the impulse strikes me constantly, I stop myself. Usually!

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 9:54 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

RBMN:

That country [that my ancestors came from] is so full of socialist lunatics that it makes me sick to think about. I'm so eternally grateful that my ancestors got the hell out.

Ah... refugee from the Swedish gulag, are you? <G>

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2006 9:56 PM

The following hissed in response by: RBMN

Ah... refugee from the Swedish gulag, are you?

No, it's the place where people go to pick up their Nobel Anti-Americanism Prize each year.

The above hissed in response by: RBMN [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 1, 2006 5:06 PM

The following hissed in response by: lmg

I took that test once. It attempts to obtain unconscious responses by making you decide quickly. It sniffed out my own biases pretty well.

But, there may be something else at work here. I believe it is true (and I'd love to hear of contrary examples) that preference for lighter-skinned individuals over darker-skinned individuals is pretty much universal, and occurs even within a group. It exists among African Americans, for example.

The above hissed in response by: lmg [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 1, 2006 5:16 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

RBMN:

No, it's the place where people go to pick up their Nobel Anti-Americanism Prize each year.

Ah. The Norwegian gulag... it makes all the difference in the world!

More Olaf Olafson, less Sven Svensen....

(I heard that in the 1970s, the three biggest industries in Sweden were Volvo, Abba, and Bjorn Borg.)

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 1, 2006 6:44 PM

The following hissed in response by: Portia

Oh, really? The European socialist gullag my ancestors came from usually only picks up Nobel prizes of literature though, trust me, idiots there are just anti-American as... (struggles for something strong enough) Code Pink.

It's discrimination, I tell you. It's because we have a genetic ability to tan.

Oh, evil racism, etc, etc, etc (fill in the usual rants.)

P.

The above hissed in response by: Portia [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 3, 2006 5:37 AM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Portia:

Hey, I can tan. Assuming you consider red to be a shade of tan.

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 3, 2006 6:34 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)


Remember me unto the end of days?


© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved