The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersThe Audacious Epigone Blog
Dunno Nuffin?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In response to the observation that self-identified political ideology is relatively unimportant in explaining black electoral behavior, tcjfs pointed to a paper suggesting that most blacks don’t know what the labels “liberal” or “conservative” mean in an American political context. As a consequence, the political identity blacks assign themselves is random. They are reliably partisan, overwhelmingly self-identifying as Democrat rather than Republican, but they don’t know that liberal tends to pair with Democrat and conservative with Republican.

It sounds plausible and likely has some explanatory power. In one of my favorite early posts found that people who identify as conservative Democrats or liberal Republicans tend to be the least intelligent people of all. Not only are liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans much smarter than them, but even moderates and independents are. Given that blacks are the least intelligent racial group in the US, it’s not particularly surprising that they’d be the most likely to stumble randomly into one of those dumb categories.

On the other hand, stripping the reliable partisan affiliation from the equation to look exclusively at political orientation, there are real differences between liberal, moderate, and conservative blacks. The following graph shows percentages of whites and blacks who support abortion for “any reason” and who support same-sex marriage, by self-identified political orientation:

On these hot-button social issues, the views of conservative whites and conservative blacks are virtually identical. Moderate and liberal whites are more progressive than their black putative ideological counterparts, but the black trends flow in the same direction as the white trends do. And even though black liberals express more moderate positions on these social issues than white liberals do, black liberals are more likely to vote Democrat than even white liberals are.

In a previous post I looked at how blacks with specifically stated socially conservative positions voted in 2012 and found that they voted overwhelmingly for Obama over Romney. While it’s conceivable that blacks don’t know the difference between liberal and conservative, they do know what marijuana and welfare are, yet even when they shared Romney’s rather than Obama’s stated views on these things, they still overwhelmingly voted for Obama.

GSS variables used: POLVIEWS(1-3)(4)(5-7), RACECEN1(1)(2), ABANY, MARHOMO(1-2,4-5)

 
Hide 25 CommentsLeave a Comment
25 Comments to "Dunno Nuffin?"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. It’s not nuffin that they dunno, it’s nuffins!

    As in “How much nuffins did a dindu do if a dindu dindu nuffins?”

    Now I’ll retire while you all carefully ponder this magnificent conundrum.

  2. The Romney:Obama contest is hard for one hoping to extract meaning of the sort you seek. I sat it out because I couldn’t make myself vote Obama despite thinking, “the ship is sinking, may as well scuttle the thing now while I can still fight to build a new ship.” Voting Romney was a non-starter, some silver spoon idiot from Bloomfield Hills and Cranbrook who believes in magic underwear and Planet Kolob will never get my vote under any circumstances. For even the most conservative and intelligent negro, there had to be a strong spark that said, “maybe electing this nigga will finally show all the stupid niggas that the only thing holding them back is themselves – this good outweighs the harm Obama’s socialist ideology will do.” It’s hard if not impossible to generalize from this.

  3. Trevor H. says:
    @Stan d Mute

    Brother, as usual you make very good points. In elections, a tremendous amount hinges upon personality, and all of the recent presidential contests demonstrate this.

    Hillary was supposed to win and had almost every conceivable advantage, but is personally cynical, pandering and dishonest.

    About McCain and Romney little needs to be said, though naturally they have their partisans here. John Kerry would have knocked off Bush (W) except for the fact that he made even his fans retch.

    If Trump were smooth and savvy, and possessed of some degree of self-control, he would have won much more decisively, would have been able to prosecute his agenda, and would be coasting toward re-election. Much hinges upon personality.

  4. In one of my favorite early posts found that people who identify as conservative Democrats or liberal Republicans tend to be the least intelligent people of all.

    It’s funny because they usually act like their big brained centrism is a sign of intelligence, not a lack thereof. I know many of these types and they are often the least engaged or just take a South Park-style fence sitting approach.

    The far left freakshow isn’t going to let them fence sit for much longer.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  5. Renoman says:

    Doesn’t matter, they don’t vote!

    • Replies: @El Dato
  6. El Dato says:
    @Renoman

    But it was Russians wot persuaded them to stay at home!

    Russians used racial division to divide us further. Goes to show what the world sees when it looks at America. Also, shows the power of the black community. So strong that there are full campaigns both inside AND outside the country to suppress our voice.

    — Ava DuVernay (@ava) December 17, 2018

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/17/us/politics/russia-2016-influence-campaign.html

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  7. @Stan d Mute

    I sat out the 2012 election. I was a huge Obamatard in 2008 but was thoroughly disillusioned when 2012 was rolling around. Romney was such a hack that I couldn’t vote for him either. In 2016, if it came down to Jeb vs. Hillary, I probably would have quit politics forever.

  8. How about low IQ and willful ignorance on the part of blacks. Since when are they known for high anaylitical skills and reading?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  9. “As a consequence, the political identity blacks assign themselves is random. ”

    We wuz kangz!

    Seriously though, the identity they assign themselves is less important than how they conduct themselves. I said this in Sailer’s blog a few weeks ago, that intact working class black families behave in a very conservative, traditional manner. This is an observation I have made through what I would say is an above average amount of work place interaction with blacks (transportation industry in the Chicago area; my wife is a social worker who screens parents and children who have been separated by DCFS, and she conducts most of her interviews in their homes.) They attend church regularly, have multiple children, put family first and do not like homosexuals. There homes are clean and cozy in a humble (as in, not excessive) way, and they dress like adults. They are critical of the degenerate culture that overshadows their racial group but don’t like it when whites meddle in those issues.

    They all shoulder the racial chip in varying degrees, but all that I’ve talked enough with always vote the black pol or absent that the Democrat in any election.

    So yes, conservative Democrats, supporting the notion that they make up the less intelligent aspects of political groupings.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Trevor H.
  10. @El Dato

    “… the power of the black community.”

    The power that the black “community” has in this country is absurdly disproportionate to its actual achievements and contributions. The negatives far outweigh the positives. Blacks owe their power to whites infected with the savior complex, which fuels the constant racial propaganda spread throughout the culture. Ava DuVernay, an awful person and, at best, a mediocre filmmaker, is a perfect example of black entitlement brought about by the machinations of the white saviors.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  11. @Stan d Mute

    Even though I self-identify as an African American, I had me a hard time filling the oval for Romney in 2012, but my biology helped me overcome that aversion when my reason had an even harder time filling the oval for BHO. I was going to be disappointed either way, but I just thought of the wise words of Lee Kuan Yew and took the right path anyway.

  12. @Stan d Mute

    I want to agree with that assessment. It seems like that should be the case. Yet as different as Romney and Trump are, the only significant demographic switch in electoral support from 2012 to 2016 was Trump losing college-educated whites and picking up a corresponding amount of whites without a college education. Everything else essentially stayed the same. Non-whites and Jews did what non-whites and Jews do.

  13. @Trevor H.

    He would’ve won the general election more decisively, agreed. But would he have been able to win the nomination in the first place had he been more savvy, smooth, and rehearsed? I think that’s more debatable. Not sure anyone thought it a good idea (electorally–obviously wrt ourselves and our posterity, it was heroic) to blast the Bush clan for lying us into Iraq in South Carolina, for example.

  14. @A Random Dude

    The cultMarx left is doing useful work for us here in their increasingly merciless treatment of the faux deliberative, thoughtful moderates. With or against!

  15. @Trevor H.

    If Trump were smooth and savvy, and possessed of some degree of self-control

    Ain’t that the truth brother, he sounds like a drunken cabbie (from back when white guys were cabbies) after reading Iacocca’s book (repeat everything three times).

    And yet.. As painful as it may be to admit, he’s the best President of my lifetime by a good margin. Reagan was a good Governor, but already senile by the time elected as President he got rolled and flung wide the floodgates on immigration. But Reagan had oodles of the charisma you allude to and seemed Presidential while Trump is basically a mirror image – non-Presidential but not so easily rolled.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  16. In a previous post I looked at how blacks with specifically stated socially conservative positions voted in 2012 and found that they voted overwhelmingly for Obama over Romney.

    Aren’t you simply reiterating what Lee Kwan Yew said?

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  17. @SunBakedSuburb

    Encyclopedic-length collections could be written on examples like this.

  18. Voting is for chumps.

  19. Feryl says:
    @Stan d Mute

    “And yet.. As painful as it may be to admit, he’s the best President of my lifetime by a good margin. Reagan was a good Governor, but already senile by the time elected as President he got rolled and flung wide the floodgates on immigration. But Reagan had oodles of the charisma you allude to and seemed Presidential while Trump is basically a mirror image – non-Presidential but not so easily rolled.”

    Reagan didn’t get “rolled”. The establishment by the late 80’s was fervently pro-immigrant, and there’s not a damn thing Ronnie could’ve done about it. Reagan and the paleos (and the pro-labor Left) were reassured that the ’86 act included punishment measures for employers who hired illegals, and this was before we had overwhelming numbers of “legal” immigrants coming here in the 90’s and subsequent decades. In practice, the by now traitorous political and economic establishment didn’t bother to enforce the employer sanctions. What was Reagan supposed to do? He’d have been destroyed as a “Nazi”, or some crypto-WASP longing for the good ole days, or a hypocrite (due to his Celtic heritage), if he had gone further in trying to rein in immigration. Besides, it wasn’t until Reagan left office that the full magnitude of cultural and demographic changes was becoming apparent (CA voted GOP in the ’88 election).

    Trump faces even less favorable conditions. He already declared himself to be some kind of crypto-fascist by saying bigoted things Mexicans and Muslims. National leaders can obviously pick favorites and enemies, but one must refrain from making sweeping derogatory statements about an entire ethnic group. In addition, our current elites have become even bigger saps (and corporate whores) regarding immigration sentiment than they were in the 80’s. Neither Trump, nor any other notable Republican that I’m aware of, has made aggressive attacks on “legal” immigration (refugee racket abuse, H1-B abuse, and Visa over-stayers slipping thru the cracks). Instead they focus, in a reactionary way, on a small minority of violent criminal immigrants, in keeping with the mass incarceration and elitist trends of the last 30 years.

    Most of the West has been economically sold out, under the guise of hippy-dippy sentiment about atoning for past “racism” (as if there was nothing positive to be gleaned from the late 1920’s-early 1960’s). For that matter, even the late 1960’s-early 1980’s are insufficiently “woke”, seeing as how the terror of college and employer enforced PC speech codes did not really began to exist until around 1987. But then, the intensity of the cold war in the 70’s and early 80’s kept us on firmer ideological ground. As soon as the cold war thawed in the late 80’s, Western whites declared war on each other (as can also be discerned from a credulous public believing that Satanists and child molesters could be found on every suburban block in the late 80’s).

    Oh, and the 1990 immigration act (cheered by Bush) was by the letter of the legislation, far worse that the ’86 one. Early 1990’s TV sitcoms made fun of how stupid and inept it was (who came up with a citizenship lottery? Really, handing out things literally at random?). We were no longer in the naive doldrums of the late 80’s, and could start to say rude things again, esp. because Bush was characteristic of how rapidly elites were selling us out in the late 80’s and early 90’s. As if rapidly expanded refugee slots, “skilled” labor slots, and the lottery weren’t enough, Bush than cheered on NAFTA, which annihilated the American working class.

  20. Trevor H. says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Much as I dislike referencing NPR, this is a decent cautionary tale about why many people could stand to be more skeptical when MSM stories include the phrase “studies have shown…”

    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/12/22/679083038/researchers-show-parachutes-dont-work-but-there-s-a-catch

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  21. Feryl says:

    Addendum: Trump and other Republicans have at times promised to get tough on immigration, but in practice it hasn’t amounted to anything. Recorded immigration levels are still much higher than they were in the late 1920’s-early 1980’s.

    The “travel ban” was a good idea in theory, but the execution was terrible. Furthermore, our political and legal establishment struck it down on the ground that it affirmed Trump’s history of “unconstitutional” public statements regarding racial preferences.

    Republicans promising to crack down on immigration since the mid-2000’s is becoming not unlike their “efforts” to over-turn Roe V Wade; these reforms sound good, and excite the base, but in practice nothing ever effectively happens. David Kaiser has admitted that his own Boomer generation has compiled an awful track record of a talent for “being” rather than doing. They can talk a good game, but what ultimately comes of it? Nothing worth celebrating, nothing that really helps us in the long run. X-ers and Millennials are tired of the empty rhetoric, tired of the theater. Aside from killing smoking, it’s hard to think of anything good that the Boomers have really done for us. They mostly are quarreling loud mouths who can’t shut up and sit still for 5 seconds, never letting reason and patience get in the way of an opportunity to self-servingly blame others for what’s gone wrong with society.

    It certainly is time for us to admit that America only is effectively governed when economic populists (Leftists) set the tone. The last 50 years have been a time of growing social Darwinism (economic elitism/conservatism), and look what’s happened to us: the Boomers who came of age hearing constantly about welfare bums and soft on crime judges have proven to be worthless as leaders, because they themselves do not believe it is in the interest of society/leadership to not do too much, lest it infringe on someone’s freedom. The only thing they seem to care about is freedom from criminals, and freedom from high taxes. That kind of cynicism, bordering on nihilism, prevents us from regulating markets, repairing broken communities, and regulating borders. How in god’s name do you expect Republicans, who constantly claim that one’s responsiblities do not extend beyond one’s immediate family, and who constantly claim that the government can’t do anything right, to suddenly get “woke” and start cracking down on corruption? Eisenhower didn’t govern during a period of rampant nihilism about the failure of society and government. Had he done so, I seriously doubt that Operation Wetback would’ve been possible.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  22. Corvinus says:
    @Former liberal

    “Since when are they known for high anaylitical skills and reading?”

    Well, if we are going to take the darkies to task, we ought to consider, from an HbD perspective, how conservatives are less likely to compromise and tend to view the world as a more threatening place because their brains predispose them to being fearful

    https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(11)00289-2

    -and-

    how conservatives are significantly more likely to be swayed by politicians’ alarmist claims.

    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0956797617692108

  23. Corvinus says:
    @Feryl

    “Eisenhower didn’t govern during a period of rampant nihilism about the failure of society and government.”

    Indeed, he governed like a (gasp) centrist, AKA a normie, AKA the “mushy middle”.

  24. @Trevor H.

    Please forgive me, but I’m not sure what the article you linked to (interesting, no doubt) has to do with what I said?

  25. The plot is broken! Please fix it

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS