I remember the Obama years, and at the time it seemed pretty obvious that the issue was regular political shenanigans had become heavy-handed with the "race card". Now the democrats had a black president, all opposition to his policies could be painted as racist, and that is what became the norm during those years. I don't think attacks on people's character was a new thing in political squabbles, of course, but it was a change to the recipe.
I also think the race activists' meal tickets were put at risk by a black president because society at large felt that we had entered a "post-racial" society. So, the racial grievances needed to be amplified to make sure people didn't stop caring about race-based issues in America. As was made clear by the BLM and DEI controversies, there is a lot of money to be made in grievance politics.
Either way, race relations clearly took a nose-dive following Obama's inauguration.
What most journalists and columnists are drawn to is primarily conflict, and yes that conflict is usually negative in some way.
This piece and entire project, for example, are outlining negative aspects of American journalism despite its many merits. That’s a good thing because we need that kind of analysis.
Contrarianism, skepticism and muckraking all bear some bias toward negativity — albeit a constructive one.
It's not that they don't want to publish it because it's good news. They need racism as a cudgel to use against their opponents to procure silence or fear.
The we research is important because it gives people tangible evidence to push back against the racism narrative. Having said that, we know that support for interracial marriage is 94%, yet I’m not sure if people recognize this either.
I really appreciate this article, but this bit struck me as weird, especially coming from someone who's not a MAGA Republican: "I thought he was getting a little carried away — two Muslim presidents in the 21st century, are we really that lucky?"
Wait, what? Did you just say that President Obama was a Muslim, despite his repeated statements that he was a Christian and his church membership?
Well for me, as a Christian, a country led by a non Christian would be a sad day. I want a leader who believes in the New Covenant. Our country was founded by mostly Protestant leaders and I’d prefer it always remain led that way.
Speaking of good news that goes mostly unheard: the major news media also isn't reporting the fact that the recruitment of new users into the hard drugs market has crashed--not just for fentanyl and fentanyl analogs, but also heroin, other opioids, amphetamine pills, methamphetamine, benzodiazepine tranquilizers, and cocaine. This is documented by the most comprehensive social trend survey--the University of Michigan's Monitoring the Future program, which has been keeping track of phenomena like recreational drug use (legal and illegal) since 1975.*
The decline is a multi-year trend, and especially evident in teenagers. The only real rise in the use of substances is in some of the party drugs, like "tuci" and ketamine. Which is concerning, but does not have the makings of another opioid or meth epidemic. Even cannabis and binge drinking are lower than previous surveys have shown.
This does not mean that the street fentanyl market is not still a serious problem! It indicates that the overdose casualties continue to be mostly drawn from the cohort of confirmed opioid addicts--those who picked up their dependency 7-10 years ago,or earlier. Fentanyl and fentanyl analogs are still killing the opioid user population in droves, but although local news stories focus on every overdose by a teenager, they are not the main victim population. I applaud the media for running stories about teenage overdose deaths--they're a form of drug education that's evidently getting through to the kids. According to the Monitoring the Future survey, few of them are even willing to try a Vicodin pill found on the street market, because they're aware of the risk of counterfeits. But the steep drop in the use of nearly all drugs by young people deserves to be a story, too.
[*The annual MtF reports have been keeping track longer and is more authoritative than any similar surveys by the Federal government--the SAMSHA report that I've accessed has a much worse format (although the survey numbers are similar)--and instead of tracking long-term trends, the report I found only provides numbers for the years 2021-2023! The ONDCP reports are even worse--they've apparently gone to an AI format that "answers inquiries" instead of allowing the data to speak for itself in graph or chart form. The ONDCP also provides "estimates" like "amount of money lost by employers due to drug abuse"--the same sort of triple-jointed "metadata" regression analysis that is increasingly infecting all sorts of statistics-related studies nowadays, because "Big Data." The effect of this is to do Summed Interpretations FOR the readership, instead of them directly accessing data sets to draw their own inferences.]
Russell, the media did that. I am not an Obama fan - though like every traditionally democratic voter, I was overjoyed when he was elected. I’d hoped he would actually do the shit he promised. I’d hoped he would address the real, systemic economic issues that exacerbate our racial issues. But no - he was just another neoliberal pro-business, pro-wall street asshole, but with darker skin.
The racial issues were mostly a product of a loud but small white nationalist movement, over reporting on those asshole by the media, the usual bullshit of American policing, and an intensely cynical liberal party yelling ‘racism’ any time Obama’s neoliberal rule was challenged.
Yeah - he did lean in to the whole identity politics thing. I get that. It's a cheap way to pretend you give AF about justice without doing anything about it.
On the other hand the whole birth certificate thing was a racist dog whistle from the right wing, and they didn't let up either.
I remember the Obama years, and at the time it seemed pretty obvious that the issue was regular political shenanigans had become heavy-handed with the "race card". Now the democrats had a black president, all opposition to his policies could be painted as racist, and that is what became the norm during those years. I don't think attacks on people's character was a new thing in political squabbles, of course, but it was a change to the recipe.
I also think the race activists' meal tickets were put at risk by a black president because society at large felt that we had entered a "post-racial" society. So, the racial grievances needed to be amplified to make sure people didn't stop caring about race-based issues in America. As was made clear by the BLM and DEI controversies, there is a lot of money to be made in grievance politics.
Either way, race relations clearly took a nose-dive following Obama's inauguration.
It's known as Equity. A bastardized and perverted idea. Purely evil.
What most journalists and columnists are drawn to is primarily conflict, and yes that conflict is usually negative in some way.
This piece and entire project, for example, are outlining negative aspects of American journalism despite its many merits. That’s a good thing because we need that kind of analysis.
Contrarianism, skepticism and muckraking all bear some bias toward negativity — albeit a constructive one.
It's not that they don't want to publish it because it's good news. They need racism as a cudgel to use against their opponents to procure silence or fear.
The we research is important because it gives people tangible evidence to push back against the racism narrative. Having said that, we know that support for interracial marriage is 94%, yet I’m not sure if people recognize this either.
I really appreciate this article, but this bit struck me as weird, especially coming from someone who's not a MAGA Republican: "I thought he was getting a little carried away — two Muslim presidents in the 21st century, are we really that lucky?"
Wait, what? Did you just say that President Obama was a Muslim, despite his repeated statements that he was a Christian and his church membership?
This was just a joke.
Seriously, though, the day a non-Christian becomes President will be a very notable day.
It will be a very sad day if/when it occurs.
How so?
Well for me, as a Christian, a country led by a non Christian would be a sad day. I want a leader who believes in the New Covenant. Our country was founded by mostly Protestant leaders and I’d prefer it always remain led that way.
LOL, got it! Poe's Law strikes again.
Speaking of good news that goes mostly unheard: the major news media also isn't reporting the fact that the recruitment of new users into the hard drugs market has crashed--not just for fentanyl and fentanyl analogs, but also heroin, other opioids, amphetamine pills, methamphetamine, benzodiazepine tranquilizers, and cocaine. This is documented by the most comprehensive social trend survey--the University of Michigan's Monitoring the Future program, which has been keeping track of phenomena like recreational drug use (legal and illegal) since 1975.*
https://monitoringthefuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/mtfpanel2024.pdf
The decline is a multi-year trend, and especially evident in teenagers. The only real rise in the use of substances is in some of the party drugs, like "tuci" and ketamine. Which is concerning, but does not have the makings of another opioid or meth epidemic. Even cannabis and binge drinking are lower than previous surveys have shown.
This does not mean that the street fentanyl market is not still a serious problem! It indicates that the overdose casualties continue to be mostly drawn from the cohort of confirmed opioid addicts--those who picked up their dependency 7-10 years ago,or earlier. Fentanyl and fentanyl analogs are still killing the opioid user population in droves, but although local news stories focus on every overdose by a teenager, they are not the main victim population. I applaud the media for running stories about teenage overdose deaths--they're a form of drug education that's evidently getting through to the kids. According to the Monitoring the Future survey, few of them are even willing to try a Vicodin pill found on the street market, because they're aware of the risk of counterfeits. But the steep drop in the use of nearly all drugs by young people deserves to be a story, too.
[*The annual MtF reports have been keeping track longer and is more authoritative than any similar surveys by the Federal government--the SAMSHA report that I've accessed has a much worse format (although the survey numbers are similar)--and instead of tracking long-term trends, the report I found only provides numbers for the years 2021-2023! The ONDCP reports are even worse--they've apparently gone to an AI format that "answers inquiries" instead of allowing the data to speak for itself in graph or chart form. The ONDCP also provides "estimates" like "amount of money lost by employers due to drug abuse"--the same sort of triple-jointed "metadata" regression analysis that is increasingly infecting all sorts of statistics-related studies nowadays, because "Big Data." The effect of this is to do Summed Interpretations FOR the readership, instead of them directly accessing data sets to draw their own inferences.]
File this headline under “No shit”
I blame the identity industry. The first thing grifters learn is that you have to create a problem if you want to sell a solution.
Obama didn’t do that.
if i had a son. come on man
Russell, the media did that. I am not an Obama fan - though like every traditionally democratic voter, I was overjoyed when he was elected. I’d hoped he would actually do the shit he promised. I’d hoped he would address the real, systemic economic issues that exacerbate our racial issues. But no - he was just another neoliberal pro-business, pro-wall street asshole, but with darker skin.
The racial issues were mostly a product of a loud but small white nationalist movement, over reporting on those asshole by the media, the usual bullshit of American policing, and an intensely cynical liberal party yelling ‘racism’ any time Obama’s neoliberal rule was challenged.
Yeah - he did lean in to the whole identity politics thing. I get that. It's a cheap way to pretend you give AF about justice without doing anything about it.
On the other hand the whole birth certificate thing was a racist dog whistle from the right wing, and they didn't let up either.
The birthernthing was started by HRC, was it not?
I remember him this way, too. It was the Ferguson riots. I was with him up until that point and then, he made it about race. That's where it started.
True. The film "What killed Michael Brown" made that plain.