There seem to be some misconceptions in the MSM about race and welfare in the United States. For instance, you often hear it stated that more whites are on welfare than blacks. After combing through the numbers, however, you find that the opposite is true.
The racial breakdown of the USA (2010 census) is:
63.7% White
16.4% Hispanic (presumably mostly mestizo or Amerindian)
12.6% Black
According to the national Office of Family Assistance, the racial breakdown of welfare recipients is:
Of those on welfare, 33.3% are black, 31.2% are white, and 28.8% are Hispanic.
So, clearly whites are drastically underrepresented in welfare recipients, while blacks and Hispanics are both overrepresented. Contrary to the illusion presented by the MSM, both in total numbers and proportionally more blacks are on welfare than whites.
Updates:
A recent report (by CIS) shows that 74.7% of Mexican immigrants with children use some form of welfare in the USA. (A racial breakdown of Mexicans is here.)
Camarota: "Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children"
Peter Bradley: "National Review Wrong (Again) on Race and Welfare"
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Monday, March 19, 2012
Gender vs. Race: A Feminist Perspective
A great post [edited] from the list. If only more feminists saw the big picture....
Gender vs. Race: A Feminist Perspective
By Samantha Powers
The zeitgeist of the day groups many causes together -- feminism, minority rights, immigration advocacy, etc. -- but this is a very loose coalition, with different parts often at odds with each other. It's not so obvious that feminism, as it was traditionally understood, belongs in the same camp of the new post-left identity politics.
Not all races of women are the same and race cuts deeper than gender.
Feminism is a product of females of Northern European ancestry. As argued by the Roman historian Tacitus, Northern European women have always had more liberties. This tend goes back thousands of years and there are probably sociobiological reasons for it, such as the particular type of monogamy that evolved among Northern Europeans. But these liberties are under fire -- not from gun-toting white males from the South but from the hoards of Third World people coming to the United States.
The new multiracial empire forming in the United States will eventually and undoubtedly be hostile toward white women. As noted by Brenda Walker, Third World immigration will hurt women. Just look at the treatment of white women by blacks and mestizos. Listen to some rap music or look at some crime statistics on Hispanics. Or look at these statistics on interracial rape in the United States:
While short-sighted feminists have declared war upon Darwinism simply because it does not conform to political correctness, Darwinian insights can provide realistic survival goals for European females. The first thing white females must realize is that race cuts deeper than gender.
A recent example. For all her talk of a "trans-racial feminism," Oprah Winfrey dropped the real feminist (Hillary Clinton) in a heartbeat to support her co-ethnic Barack Obama (who's a lukewarm feminist at best). As did nearly all other black women. You see, non-whites are not as naive as whites when it comes to identity politics; whites too often believe in abstract universals (which works for mathematics) but can be detrimental when it comes to politics.
Another example that comes to mind is the OJ Simpson trial. Feminist prosecutor Marcia Clark tried to pack the jury with white women, and Johnnie Cochran tried to pack it with black men. They compromised with a jury of mostly black females. Well, we know the end of that story.
In terms of IQ (intelligence), the IQ differences between genders is minimal and IQ largely tracks by race. For instance, the average white female will have significantly higher IQ than both black males and black females. Regarding trans-racial bonding, white females, intellectually, have very little in common with black females. Why would we want to be grouped with them?
I could give many more examples of race trumping gender but a greater insight is the realization that throughout human history nearly 90% or more of all wars have been ethnic conflicts of sorts. Even many religious wars were truly ethno-religious wars. History has yet to demonstrate a gender war. The very idea that men and women would divide by gender and then attempt to exterminate each other is ridiculous from a Darwinian perspective because it would reduce everyone's inclusive fitness. If "war is the great clarifier," as they say, then the very absence of armed "gender wars" clearly demonstrates the primacy of race over gender.
People sort by race. They always have; they always will. A white man and a white woman can pair up, have a child, and each will increase his or her inclusive fitness. Not so with a white female and black female teaming up, for even if they adopted, say a "mixed-race (black-white) child, each female would be around 55x more closely related to her co-ethnics than to the adopted child. Their inclusive fitness would be diminished."
Once again, race trumps gender. A lesson that all feminists today need to learn. A reality that Margaret Sanger knew very well but many feminists today seem to have forgotten.
Gender vs. Race: A Feminist Perspective
By Samantha Powers
The zeitgeist of the day groups many causes together -- feminism, minority rights, immigration advocacy, etc. -- but this is a very loose coalition, with different parts often at odds with each other. It's not so obvious that feminism, as it was traditionally understood, belongs in the same camp of the new post-left identity politics.
Not all races of women are the same and race cuts deeper than gender.
Feminism is a product of females of Northern European ancestry. As argued by the Roman historian Tacitus, Northern European women have always had more liberties. This tend goes back thousands of years and there are probably sociobiological reasons for it, such as the particular type of monogamy that evolved among Northern Europeans. But these liberties are under fire -- not from gun-toting white males from the South but from the hoards of Third World people coming to the United States.
The new multiracial empire forming in the United States will eventually and undoubtedly be hostile toward white women. As noted by Brenda Walker, Third World immigration will hurt women. Just look at the treatment of white women by blacks and mestizos. Listen to some rap music or look at some crime statistics on Hispanics. Or look at these statistics on interracial rape in the United States:
"In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man. What this means is that every day in the United States, over one hundred white women are raped or sexually assaulted by a black man."
While short-sighted feminists have declared war upon Darwinism simply because it does not conform to political correctness, Darwinian insights can provide realistic survival goals for European females. The first thing white females must realize is that race cuts deeper than gender.
A recent example. For all her talk of a "trans-racial feminism," Oprah Winfrey dropped the real feminist (Hillary Clinton) in a heartbeat to support her co-ethnic Barack Obama (who's a lukewarm feminist at best). As did nearly all other black women. You see, non-whites are not as naive as whites when it comes to identity politics; whites too often believe in abstract universals (which works for mathematics) but can be detrimental when it comes to politics.
Another example that comes to mind is the OJ Simpson trial. Feminist prosecutor Marcia Clark tried to pack the jury with white women, and Johnnie Cochran tried to pack it with black men. They compromised with a jury of mostly black females. Well, we know the end of that story.
In terms of IQ (intelligence), the IQ differences between genders is minimal and IQ largely tracks by race. For instance, the average white female will have significantly higher IQ than both black males and black females. Regarding trans-racial bonding, white females, intellectually, have very little in common with black females. Why would we want to be grouped with them?
I could give many more examples of race trumping gender but a greater insight is the realization that throughout human history nearly 90% or more of all wars have been ethnic conflicts of sorts. Even many religious wars were truly ethno-religious wars. History has yet to demonstrate a gender war. The very idea that men and women would divide by gender and then attempt to exterminate each other is ridiculous from a Darwinian perspective because it would reduce everyone's inclusive fitness. If "war is the great clarifier," as they say, then the very absence of armed "gender wars" clearly demonstrates the primacy of race over gender.
People sort by race. They always have; they always will. A white man and a white woman can pair up, have a child, and each will increase his or her inclusive fitness. Not so with a white female and black female teaming up, for even if they adopted, say a "mixed-race (black-white) child, each female would be around 55x more closely related to her co-ethnics than to the adopted child. Their inclusive fitness would be diminished."
Once again, race trumps gender. A lesson that all feminists today need to learn. A reality that Margaret Sanger knew very well but many feminists today seem to have forgotten.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)