Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Another narrative bites the dust: Proof the Left is racist



Another narrative bites the dust Proof the Left is racist

A study from Yale University shows that Leftists treat minorities differently, presuming that they are less competent than others.

It’s become tiresomely repetitive for the Left to hurl pejoratives when they have run out of good ideas or good arguments. The words of invective have lost all meaning to the point that Racist, Sexist, Transphobic, etc, etc. are just bland white noise signifying that they are bereft of debating skills or new concepts.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. Martin Luther King

The rule should be judge people by the content of their character.

The Left’s incessant use of certain pejoratives is especially galling since most of the Pro-Liberty Right follow that common sense admonition. The fact being that such invective is only effective against those who aren’t guilty of the accusation. Advocates of identity politics stand in stark opposition to Martin Luther King, emphasising skin colour and ethnicity rather than the content of one’s character

Well, now a new study from Yale University  has dealt another blow to one of the Left’s most cherished false narratives. To hear them talk of it, they are the universal paragons of tolerance and enlightenment feverishly working to alleviate the ravages of racism brought on by none other than Republicans.

The Problem is that this isn’t the case, it is they who look down on certain people based on skin colour. The study analysed the speeches given by both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates to various audiences. They found that Democrats tended to reduce the competence level of their language when speaking to minorities. In effect they presumed that their audience in that situation was of inferior intelligence.

Dupree and her co-author, Susan Fiske of Princeton University, began by analyzing the words used in campaign speeches delivered by Democratic and Republican presidential candidates to different audiences over the years. They scanned 74 speeches delivered by white candidates over a 25-year period. Approximately half were addressed to mostly-minority audiences—at a Hispanic small business roundtable discussion or a black church, for example. They then paired each speech delivered to a mostly-minority audience with a comparable speech delivered at a mostly-white audience—at a mostly-white church or university, for example. The researchers analyzed the text of these speeches for two measures: words related to competence (that is, words about ability or status, such as “assertive” or “competitive”) and words related to warmth (that is, words about friendliness, such as “supportive” and “compassionate”).

The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences.

This was not the case with Republican candidates, although it was acknowledged that it was of a smaller sample size.

The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, though “it was harder to find speeches from Republicans delivered to minority audiences,” Dupree notes.

Attempts were made by to spin the conclusions about why this was done. But they admit that this could be happening because people [Meaning Democrats] tended to use ‘common stereotypes’ in making racial assumptions about their audience.

The Takeaway.

One could make as easy wager on whether this study will even be mentioned by the nation’s socialist media. The situation would be far different had the results been the reverse.

Knowing the Left as we do, the facts of this study will mean nothing to them. People who take on the false pretence of being ‘Liberal’ or ‘Progressive’ when that isn’t the case generally don’t listen to the facts that challenge their self-congratulatory worldview. These are folks who assume they hold the moral high ground, so no one is supposed to confuse them with the reality of who they truly are.