PERCEIVED RATIONALITY'S END: "Academically," they're "three grades behind!"


Also, why aren't they in advanced classes?:
How far will the New York Times go to wage its war against "segregated schools," wherever such schools can be found?

Today, in a lengthy editorial,
the Times extends its war to the battleground of sentence structure itself. Here's how the editorial begins, hard-copy headline included:
NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL (9/3/19): Diversifying New York's Schools

New York’s public schools are among the most racially segregated in the country.

That’s partly a result of decades of policies that have allowed parents of well-off white and many Asian students to steer their children to the most sought-after public schools, while largely consigning the Hispanic and black children, who make up an overwhelming majority of students, to underperforming schools.
First, a tip of the hat to the board! The editors should be commended for using the term "diversifying" in their headline, rather than the more exciting term, "desegregating."

In our view, we should be trying to "diversify" student enrollment in our public schools where that's sensibly possible. But when we speak about "desegregating" schools like those in New York City, we start unnecessary, distracting fights about whether the schools in question are "segregated" at all.

In the process, one tribe gets to feel morally pure. Another tribe gets to feel alienated.

We wish the Times would regulate its persistent use of the fraught term, "segregated." Beyond that, though, today's editorial raises a point about Gotham schools which should be explored in depth.

We'll discuss that topic later this week. It's amazing to us that we've never seen this matter discussed in the Times before.

Having said this, alas! After their encouraging use of "diversifying," the editors launch directly into the murky but beloved claim according to which "New York [City's] public schools are among the most racially segregated in the country."

In support of this claim, they clownishly link to this March 26 report in their own newspaper, in which their own reporter, Eliza Shapiro, makes this same assertion. But as we showed you Saturday, Shapiro's link in support of that claim wound its way back to a murky, dated assessment—also in the New York Times—according to which Gotham's schools were less "segregated" than those in Chicago, more so than those in L.A.

According to that dated assessment,
Gotham's schools (in 2009) were third-most "segregated" among those found in our thirteen largest cities. Though in fairness, Gotham's numbers at that time didn't differ all that much from those attributed to the systems ranked fourth, fifth and sixth.

In short, Gotham's school system, ten years ago, was the third, though not that far from the sixth, "most segregated in the country," though only among a group of thirteen. It should also be noted that this assessment only applied to black and white kids. (No Hispanic kids need apply.)

Beyond that, it isn't clear what the term "segregated" even meant in the original Times assessment. Of one thing you can be totally sure—the people who wrote today's editorial couldn't explain that point!

In a word, sad! That dated, murky ranking is the sole basis on which the editors make today's exciting claim—but having said that, so what? Having started their editorial with this parody of journalistic exposition, they proceeded to craft this spectacularly parodic pseudo-sentence:
"That’s partly a result of decades of policies that have allowed parents of well-off white and many Asian students to steer their children to the most sought-after public schools..."
Gotham's policies have allowed parents of "well-off white and many Asian students" to steer their kids to sought-after schools? Go ahead! Those of you who are fluent in English are permitted to laugh out loud!

Why did the editors craft that laughable sentence, in which the term "well-off" somehow exists in parallel construction with the term "many?"

Why did the editors hand you that parodic construction? Given the fact that they're professional writers, why didn't they simply write this?
"That’s partly a result of decades of policies that have allowed parents of well-off white and Asian students to steer their children to the most sought-after public schools..."
Why didn't the editor write that sentence? Because they know that the Asian students in question come from the lowest-income demographic in the New York City school system! This fact has been noted, again and again, in the Times itself.

However "well-off" those white kids might be, those Asian kids, as a group, aren't "well-off" at all! But the editors wanted to pimp home their point, and so they decided to play you.

The sentence they crafted is cause for laughter; the editors themselves are the joke. As much as they despise the level of "segregation" which they themselves could never explain; as much as they enjoy reviling the families who send their kids to the best schools available; as much as their minions have enjoyed sliming those Asian families with a well-worn "racial trope:"

As much as they enjoy these games, we'd love to see the actual facts about where their children are going to school—about the heroic ways they themselves have avoided playing a role in the "school segregation" they so impressively loathe.

We note, for example, that the editorial page editor has two sons. So it says in his company biography, on this apparent list of the 15-member board.

It isn't the editor's fault that he himself prepped at St. Albans, but where do his kids go to school? Given the ardor with which these horrible people keep sliming low-income Asian families for their role in segregation, we'd like to see the actual facts about the conduct of the members themselves!

For the record:

Though the Times makes it amazingly hard for an observer to be sure, we assume that that is the current membership of the board. Let it be said that, despite their horror concerning the segregation they see all around them, there are only two blacks, and no apparent Hispanics, listed among their current fifteen members.

In short, these showboats seem to be having a difficult time "desegregating" themselves! Beyond that, none of the fifteen has a background in education reporting—and dear God, how it does seem to show!

Whatever! That sentence today is laugh-out-loud faux, but it's also an insult to journalism. So is the recurrent claim about where Gotham's schools rank among the nation's most segregated, whatever that term is supposed to mean in the present context—and we'll guarantee you that the editors could neither explain that point nor cite the source of their claim.

That pseudo-sentence today is parodic, but so, we'd have to say, was Saturday's scolding news report, live and direct from South Orange and Maplewood, New Jersey.

In that case, the news division had sent someone out to report on the segregation which had been spotted in those adjoining locales. As we noted yesterday, the reporter in question was Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura, who prepped at Lycee International de Saint-Germain-en-Laye and doesn't have a background in education reporting herself.

It isn't de Freytas-Tamura's fault that she was sent on this mission. That said, we think the report she produced helps us consider an important anthropological point:

How do we humans start to behave at times of substantial tribal division and resulting cultural stress? What happens to the "rationality" for which our vastly self-impressed species has long claimed to be famous?

When de Freytas-Tamura met Maplewood, a bit of truth was perhaps revealed about the actual nature of our floundering species. By way of full disclosure, top anthropologists have helped us place last weekend's report in its proper context.

Aristotle to the side, what are we humans actually like? The Times' Maplewood monologue may help us see, though we'll have to postpone till tomorrow.

Tomorrow: "Academically three grades behind," the puzzled reporter said


  1. "How do we humans start to behave at times of substantial tribal division and resulting cultural stress?"

    It's called 'politics', dear Bob.

    Here is the short version for you: globalist banksters want to install clowns subservient to them (various Clintons, Bidens, Warrens, etc) to the highest government posts. For that purpose they hire corrupt journos to incite racial hatred, to harvest as many underclass votes as possible.

    And that's it. That's the story, dear Bob.

    1. Banksters are calling Trump "Sitting Bullshit" because Trump wants to hold them accountable for their crimes?
      I hadn't heard anything like that. Any chance you can back up any of your nonsense with facts?

  2. Another dembot day off, eh?

    Oh yeah, it figures. Happy Ganesh Chaturthi, dembots.

  3. Political correctness can harm blacks. Bob points out the Times's subtle deceptiveness, "... parents of well-off white and many Asian students..." The Times is avoiding the straightforward statement, "Poor Asians outperform whites. This shows that poverty alone is not the reason blacks under-perform."

    The Times probably feels virtuous for avoiding this blunt fact. However, when policymakers are misled about the real problem, they will devise ineffective policies. Blacks would be better served by realism.

    1. Weren't you the guy cheering on political correctness just this week?
      Something about not calling Conservatives "racists" or "facsists".

  4. Not to overlook the fact that DinC is a congenital liar.

  5. IMHO blacks would be better served by policies that strengthen families and that encourage self-reliance, education and individual success. Some possible policies:
    -- change welfare so it doesn't encourage families without men
    -- find a way to encourage marriage
    -- fix Head Start so that it really provides the academic boost it was supposed to. As it stands, it's primarily a jobs program and a baby-sitting program.
    -- continue Trump's economic policies, which have led to record black unemployment
    -- End affirmative action in college admissions. This approach has led to blacks in schools where they're behind. They get squeezed out of STEM majors and have a graduation rate below 50%.
    -- Keep illegal immigrants out, so that entry-level jobs will be available for black youths.

    @5:04 Your immediate mention of genetics is striking. I didn't bring that subject up; you did.

  6. Check your post from two or three days ago re:genetics.
    As I said, and reinforce it, you are a congenital liar.

  7. @5:04's comment may explain why the Times focuses on an impossible integration plan and a phony test prep explanation. There are a bunch of taboos when discussing blacks doing worse than whites and Asians:

    1. The Times can't say black culture is inferior to white and Asian culture.

    2. The Times can't say that Democratic policies have held blacks back.

    3. The Times certainly can't say that there's a genetic difference.

    4. The Times can't blame poverty alone, because poor Asians outperform whites.

    So, the Times has no choice but to propound silly explanations that Bob Somerby ridicules.

  8. STEM majors, David? STEM? Maybe they don't want to take STEM majors, did you ever think of that? Maybe they want to be appointed to some high level post in the tRump administration like the USDA Chief Scientist. Or maybe they have higher ambition like gutting the EPA. STEM!!! Bahh! We are the modern republican party, we fart in the general direction of "science". Who needs those fucking eggheads when you have Donald J Chickenshit's fat lying ass to solve the world's science problems.

  9. The subject is, or ought to be, black education, not DiC. Sure, he sometimes displays weak to nonexistent intellectual integrity, but don’t we all?

    Anyhoo, might I suggest y’all begin by perusing the following article before you fall off your respective high horses:
    Harvard Educational Review of John U. Ogbu's “Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement”

    Now, google “John Ogbu” and read the greatest hits. There WILL be a test.

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. Interesting. Thanks.

      It would be interesting to see a study of how black children from affluent families fare in schools where they are the majority pop, with predominately black teachers and administrations, in upscale enclaves such as Shaker Heights.

      If that could be possible.

    3. Ogbu's theories were received as important for a season, and then as controversial before being tarred as associated with the backlash provoking late '90s public relations disaster of the Oakland (School Board) Ebonics Resolution. Now, in aggregate, they are considered somewhat dated, though, no doubt, that is a result of Ogbu's untimely death in 2003 at age 64. See, for instance:

      NY Times

      The 'Acting White' Myth
      By Paul Tough
      Dec. 12, 2004

      When Bill Cosby spoke out publicly in May against dysfunction and irresponsibility in black families, he identified one pervasive symptom: "boys attacking other boys because the boys are studying and they say, 'You're acting white."' This idea isn't new; it was first proposed formally in the mid-80's by John Ogbu, a Nigerian professor of anthropology at the University of California at Berkeley, and it has since become almost a truism: when smart black kids try hard and do well, they are picked on by their less successful peers for "acting white."

      The only problem with this theory, according to a research paper released in October, is that for the most part, it isn't true. Karolyn Tyson, a sociologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and William Darity Jr., an economist at Duke and U.N.C., coordinated an 18-month ethnographic study at 11 schools in North Carolina. What they found was that black students basically have the same attitudes about achievement as their white counterparts do: they want to succeed, understand that doing well in school has important consequences in later life and feel better about themselves the better they do....
      [END QUOTE]

    4. Well, if “it isn’t true,” what is? Given the achievement gaps at all levels of SES (socioeconomic status) and schools of attendance, the only explanation left is not pretty. For my part, I consider the research quoted to be worthless as it appears to be based on highly suspect self-reported attitudes. It reminds me of another study I came across in which blacks’ self-reported hours of homework, equal to those of their white schoolmates, were taken at face value. Not by me, they aren’t. But if they were, what then?

      Ogbu’s work was derided by the usual suspects as blaming the victim. There’s enough blame to go around in this matter, including by the victims.

  10. Max Life Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana - Apply for Max Life Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana Online with Axis Bank. Get All the information ...
    All Pradhan Mantri Yojana 2019


  11. Hello am here to testify of a great and powerful spell caster. my Wife left me and my two kids for a couple months, I tried to beg her even I called her, she didn't pick up when she came back home the 3rd week she told me she wanted a divorce I was so sad I cried all night he left again I was so lonely the next day I was searching for something online when i found a spell caster called DR ADEKUNLE, who have helped so many people with their various issues and problems, so I contacted him with my problems he told me it will take 24hrs and my Wife will be back to me I did everything he told me to do and the next day very early my wife came back kneeling and begging she canceled the divorce we are now happy together all thanks to DR ADEKUNLE
    he also cure
    he can also help you too, contact him directly if you need his assistance on EMAIL:-
    or whatsapp him +2349059123256

  12. Hello everyone out there, help me Thank Dr UGO! My name is MRS LINDA from Netherlands. I am here to give testimony on how I got my ex husband back, my husband left me for no reason 6 Months. He moved in with another woman, I felt like killing myself, my life became very bitter and sorrowful. Then 1 day, a friend of mine told me about a great spell caster that is very good and she said that he told her all about her life history and the problem she is facing, I didn't believe it because I've worked with so many of them and it didn't work. She begged me further so I decided to try this great spell caster called Great Dr UGO. I still didn't believe, but inside me I wanted to give a try and as God will have it, I used the spell solution he gave me and the next day I received a call from my darling husband Romero last month. He apologized and came back to me. I'm very happy now with my family it worked for me and I believe it will work for you too just give him a try and follow up this is a clear truth from a testifier. Thank you Dr UGO once again, if you want to reach him via email:( 


  13. LOTTO, lottery,jackpot.
    Hello all my viewers, I am very happy for sharing this great testimonies,The best thing that has ever happened in my life is how I win the lottery euro million mega jackpot. I am a Woman who believe that one day I will win the lottery. finally my dreams came through when I email and tell him I need the lottery numbers. I have spend so much money on ticket just to make sure I win. But I never know that winning was so easy until the day I meant the spell caster online which so many people has talked about that he is very great in casting lottery spell, . so I decide to give it a try.I contacted this great Dr Believe and he did a spell and he gave me the winning lottery numbers. But believe me when the draws were out I was among winners. I win 30,000 million Dollar. Dr Believe truly you are the best, all thanks to you forever