Black Scholars and Spokespersons: Admirable Views on Racism

By Dom Nozzi

The following is my list of black scholars and spokespersons who have heroically taken what I am thoroughly convinced are essential views in the quest to improve problems that continue to be experienced in much of the American black culture.

Tellingly, these people are considered exceptionally “politically incorrect” by those people – who I will hear call the social justice fundamentalists — that have been pushing the “victimhood,” “oppression” and “racism” agenda in America since the 1960s. These fundamentalist zealots – the self-proclaimed enlightened activists – have ironically pushed an ideology that has created severe obstacles to the extremely important need to reduce problems that continue to be experienced in much of the American black community. These activists are also known as “Woke,” “Race Hustlers,” “Black Lives Matter” activists, or “Antifa.”

I am gratified to know that there is a growing number of blacks who are escaping from this highly counterproductive ideology and are instead promoting highly beneficial ideas about how the American black culture can advance.

For most on the authoritarian political left, blaming the dysfunctional aspects of American black culture for ongoing black problems is intolerable and considered “racist.” The cult-like zombies of the authoritarian left insist that problems in the black community can only be blamed on blacks being victimized by racism. See this blog I wrote which describes how I distinguish between the “authoritarian political left” and my own (sometimes political Left) views.

There has developed a significant difference of opinion on how to address problems faced by black Americans. Equality of opportunity is, as Martin Luther King pointed out, an essential part of an equitable, civilized, healthy society. Tragically, MLKs objective has been distorted by well-meaning people to include equality of outcome, which is, I and many others believe, ruinous for society.

It should be self-evident that a larger number of black people are far more likely to succeed in the future if they take more personal responsibility for failures instead of engaging in knee-jerk victimhood (in this case, by blaming racism for individual failures).

When we blame racism and thereby engage in unfair affirmative action or diversity programs that preference skin color (or gender) over competence, we inevitably, understandably, and appropriately increase the amount of resentment felt by whites (and those who are successful or meritorious). I believe when individuals in the black community blame racism less and take more personal responsibility for failures, we will ratchet down the ongoing resentment we are seeing in “white supremacy” groups.

Racism, it must be noted, seems very hard to find since the 1960s, unless we stretch the definition of racism to include classism.

I question classism as a valid way to identify racism.

Ironically, the biggest obstacles to black family advancement, less racial animosity, less violence, and less poverty are the policies and ideas of many black activists and many authoritarian progressives since the 1960s – policies and beliefs that unfortunately remain very much in place today.

An important downside to victimhood, of course, is that many individuals raised within the black culture (and many liberals defending anti-social black behaviors) too often fail to take personal responsibility for failure. Instead, many lazily blame their upbringing or perceived “racism.” We are told that it had nothing to do with not taking schooling seriously, or messing around with drugs or teen sex or petty crimes or promoting “gangsta” rap.

In addition to these problem-inducing characteristics, I agree with many that much of the black culture does not do well in cultivating stable parenting. These traits will predictably lead to a future of adult dysfunction, poverty, and crime. Many blacks and their authoritarian progressive enablers too often excuse the black failures and black crimes by blaming racism – failures and crimes that are inevitable, given the many dysfunctional cultural tendencies of the black community and its enablers. Too rarely do blacks and authoritarian progressive activists call for personal responsibility and reform of the other counterproductive cultural tactics I mention above. Too many black children grow up in single-parent households and this goes a long way toward explaining why young black males are 6 percent of the population yet commit about 50 percent of all violent crimes. It also helps describe school and career problems that many blacks continue to experience.

There is strong evidence this is a cultural problem rather than a problem of “systemic” or “institutional” racism. Consider this: recent black immigrants tend to show success rates far higher than those in black communities where families have lived in America for a considerable period of time. One commentator (Coleman Hughes) notes, for example, an instance in New York City, where two black neighborhoods adjacent to each other showed drastically different rates of success. One a neighborhood of American blacks and another adjacent neighborhood consisting of Jamaican blacks. The latter neighborhood showed far higher rates of success. Since both neighborhoods are black, it seems absurd to claim that the less successful neighborhood was failing due to skin color.

In sum, the problem (as the many black intellectuals I list below repeatedly proclaim) is not racism. It is a cultural and family problem. Similarly, the remedy for alleged discrimination against blacks (or women) is not to discriminate against white males (via affirmative action, diversity programs, etc.). Two wrongs do not make a right. Unfairly preferencing based on skin color or gender has made problems worse over the past 60 years, and has given rise to a great many people now supporting populists such as Trump for president.

Let’s follow MLK: Equal opportunity. Not equal outcome. The latter is ruinous. Equality of outcome is the end of fairness. The end of fairness (i.e., rewarding people via the “identity politics” of skin color or gender, rather than merit) inevitably leads to the end of civility, bitter resentment, the rise of right-wing reactionary politics, and violence. It is an ends-justify-the-means game that has been played by several cruel, genocidal, societies engaged in secular religions such as communism. A game in which cruelty and unfairness are justified to achieve an envisioned “paradise” where, it is claimed by its fundamentalist advocates, no one is oppressed or discriminated against.

Equality of outcome is an idea that wrongly believes that unequal representation of women or blacks is a sure sign of discrimination. It is a belief that unequal outcome must be rectified by including more women and blacks regardless of competency.

This extreme and ruinous unfairness must be ended.

Not ending well-meaning but counterproductive equality of outcome programs is certain to result in more voters voting for populists such as Donald Trump, and supporting white supremacy groups, in the future.

Equality of outcome perpetuates the idea that blacks are inferior.

Equality of outcome perpetuates the problem of too many young black males engaging in a disproportionately large number of violent crimes.

I for one do not want to perpetuate this with equal outcome programs. Or perpetuate the problem by wrongly assuming that the problem is “systemic racism.”

Affirmative action, “diversity” campaigns, and giving preference to minorities not based on merit but based only on skin color or gender is patently unfair and inevitably leads to backlash. A lot of white males are not stupid. They are sick of decades of unfair treatment in the name of “racial justice” or “discrimination against women.”

The only time this nation will see a reduction in anger coming from white males is when everyone is treated equally. We cannot continue to give blacks (or women) an unfair preference to correct historical discrimination.

Since when is it okay to discriminate because the person we discriminate against is a white male?

My List of Admirable Black (and a Few White) Scholars and Spokespersons

John McWhorter

Black scholar John McWhorter is an American academic and associate professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University, where he teaches linguistics, American studies, philosophy, and music history. He is the author of a number of books on language and on race relations, and his writing has appeared in many prominent magazines. His research specializes in how creole languages form, and how language grammars change as the result of socio-historical phenomena.

McWhorter argues that anti-intellectualism, separatism, and victimhood are strongly embedded within the American black culture since the 1960s. But anyone these days who dares to suggest that these dysfunctional traits of the American black culture are holding back black advance, as McWhorter and many other scholars suggest, is vigorously attacked by the Social Justice Left, antifa, many blacks fighting racism, “wokesters,” Black Lives Matter (BLM) activists – all of whom I call “authoritarian progressives.”

John McWhorter on the question “Has Anti-Racism Become as Harmful as Racism? (and why anti-racism has become a religion)”

Coleman Hughes

Coleman Hughes is an opinion columnist on issues related to race and racism at the online magazine Quillette, a fellow and contributing editor at City Journal, and host of the podcast Conversations with Coleman. He is a graduate of Newark Academy. Hughes is of African American and Puerto Rican descent, and grew up in Montclair, New Jersey. He graduated from Columbia University in 2020 with a B.A. in philosophy.

Hughes on the non-existence of systemic racism

Hughes on why the political left is wrong on racism

Hughes on the empirical problems with systemic racism

Candace Owens

Candace Owens is an American conservative author, commentator, and political activist. While a 17-year-old senior in high school, Owens said she received three racist death threat voicemail messages.

Candace Owens on What Does Black America Want?

Candace Owens

On the meaninglessness of gender studies and failure of education

Anthony Brian Logan

Anthony Brian Logan grew up in Virginia. After college, he started his own business as a graphics designer for goods such as posters, business cards and T-Shirts. He regularly posts commentary on YouTube, and calls himself a “Common Sense Conservative.”

Anthony Brian Logan on how BLM and “critical race theory” perpetuates racism and should be abolished.

Anthony Brian Logan on whyI’m done with empathy for the Floyd protestors

Dr. Carol Swain

Dr. Carol Swain is an award-winning political scientist, and a former professor of political science and professor of law at Vanderbilt University. Before joining Vanderbilt in 1999, Dr. Swain was a tenured associate professor of politics and public policy at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.

Dr. Carol Swain on why BLM is Marxism and does not care about blacks

Jason Riley

Jason Riley is an American journalist and pundit. He is a member of The Wall Street Journal editorial board. Riley is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and has appeared on the Journal Editorial Report, other Fox News programs and C-SPAN.

Jason Riley asks liberals to please stop helping us. How liberals make it harder for blacks to succeed

Jason Riley on the destruction of college education by the political left (the loss of diversity of ideas and loss of skepticism)

Josephine Mathias

Josephine Mathias is a content creator on Youtube. She is a freelance columnist and video commentator at National Post.

Josephine Mathias on the truth about political leftists and the black community

Larry Elder

Larry Elder is an American conservative talk radio host, author, attorney, and documentary filmmaker who hosts The Larry Elder Show. Elder has also written nonfiction books and a nationally syndicated column through Creators Syndicate. An honors student who also took advanced courses at Fairfax High School, Elder graduated from Crenshaw High School in 1970 and earned his B.A. in political science in 1974 from Brown University. He then earned his J.D. from University of Michigan Law School in 1977:

Uncle Tom movie trailer with Larry Elder

Larry Elder on the myth of racism

Larry Elder on the myth of racism regarding law enforcement and whether any real, institutional racism still exists in the US (starting at 8:00)

Larry Elder on “systemic racism” and how the “police brutality” narrative is getting people killed

Larry Elder on research showing BLM claims that blacks are disprortionately killed by cops is false: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM-hsLpMqHY

Denzel Washington

A black American actor, director, and producer. Known for his performances on the screen and stage.

Brandon Tatum

Brandon (“Officer”) Tatum is a former Tucson Police Officer and current host of The Brandon Tatum show on KTAR 92.3. He has become one of the most prolific speakers and exciting personalities on social media after making a Facebook Video that got over 70 million views. Tatum has a following of over one million people spread across various social media platforms. He has been featured on Fox Business, Fox & Friends, Headline News, One America News, Revolt TV to name a few. Tatum has been invited by The President of The United States, President Donald Trump to the White House on several occasions.

Brandon Tatum on “enough with the anti-white rhetoric”

David Webb

David Webb is the host of the David Webb show. He is the October 2015 recipient of the National Police Defense Foundation’s Excellence in Media Award. In January 2015, he debated at the Oxford Union defending against the proposition that America is institutionally racist. In 2012, he appeared in the documentary District of Corruption. In 2012, he appeared in the documentary Runaway Slave. In December 2011, he was selected as a Time Magazine Person of the Year ~ “The Protester,” representing the tea party movement. In November 2010, he was listed in About.com’s Satellite Radio’s New School of Conservative Talk Stars. In September 2010, he was named to the Newsweek Inside The Tea Party Top 10:

David Webb on why the US is not institutionally racist

Shelby Steele

Shelby Steele is an American conservative author, columnist, documentary film maker, and a Robert J. and Marion E. Oster Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He specializes in the study of race relations, multiculturalism, and affirmative action. In 1990, he received the National Book Critics Circle Award in the general nonfiction category for his book The Content of Our Character.

Shelby Steele on white guilt and the identity of innocence

Burgess Owens

Burgess Owens is a former NFL football player and candidate for Congress. These comments address racism in the NFL, failing black schools and the dying black middle class. Burgess Owens discusses how liberal and socialist ideas have infected the black education system for decades. These failing schools teach kids to hate free markets, the main factor in creating the wealth and prosperity that Americans have enjoyed. Teaching kids to hate free markets has resulted in low levels of entrepreneurship in the black community. The lower numbers of black businesses leads to a collapsing black middle class. Burgess shares what the black community needs to do to reverse this, support black business, and rebuild the black middle class.

Burgess Owens on how politically left policies are destroying the black middle class

Glenn Loury

Glenn Loury is an American economist, academic, and author. In 1982, at the age of 33, he became the first black tenured professor of economics in the history of Harvard University. He is the Merton P. Stoltz Professor of the Social Sciences and Professor of Economics at Brown University.

Glenn Loury on how “We’re Being Swept Along by Hysteria” About Racism in America

Jason Riley, Coleman Hughes, Rafael Mangual, Jamil Jivani

Race, Riots, and the Police

Leo Terrell

Leo Terrell is an American civil rights attorney and talk radio host based in Los Angeles. In a July 2020 interview, he declared his support for President Donald Trump—the first time he declared support for a Republican Party presidential candidate. Terrell graduated from Gardena High School of Harbor Gateway, Los Angeles in 1972 and California State University, Dominguez Hills in 1977 with a BA. Terrell taught high school history, geography and economics at Gage Middle School in Huntington Park, CA. He holds a master’s degree in education from Pepperdine University and holds a J.D. degree from the UCLA School of Law.

This is Leo Terrell on why he is “Shocked No Democratic Lawmaker is Standing Up To Criminals Rioting after the Floyd killing”

Jakhary Jackson

Jakhary Jackson is an Officer with the Portland Police Bureau. He offers his perspective as a black officer in the middle of downtown Portland’s nightly protests that occurred for several consecutive months recently.

Jakhary Jackson on what the Portland police were experiencing in the Portland riots

Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell is an American economist and social theorist who is currently a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He attended night classes at Howard University, a historically black college. His high scores on the College Board exams and recommendations by two professors helped him gain admission to Harvard University, where he graduated magna cum laude in 1958 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics. He earned a Master’s degree from Columbia University the following year. Sowell has said that he was a Marxist “during the decade of my 20s;” accordingly, one of his earliest professional publications was a sympathetic examination of Marxist thought vs. Marxist–Leninist practice. However, his experience working as a federal government intern during the summer of 1960 caused him to reject Marxian economics in favor of free market economic theory. During his work, Sowell discovered an association between the rise of mandated minimum wages for workers in the sugar industry of Puerto Rico and the rise of unemployment in that industry. Studying the patterns led Sowell to theorize that the government employees who administered the minimum wage law cared more about their own jobs than the plight of the poor. Sowell received a Doctor of Philosophy degree in economics from the University of Chicago in 1968. His dissertation was titled “Say’s Law and the General Glut Controversy”. Sowell had initially chosen Columbia University to study under George Stigler, who would later receive the Nobel Prize in Economics. When he learned that Stigler had moved to the University of Chicago, he followed him there.

Thomas Sowell on “Three Questions for the Left, and the “Deregulation of Fannie and Freddie just before the 2007 Housing Bubble Crash”

Thomas Sowell on the myths of economic inequality

Thomas Sowell on how the political left wreaks havoc on blacks

The Stupidity of Apologizing for Slavery

Thomas Sowell on Diversity

Thomas Sowell on what fairness advocates get wrong

Thomas Sowell on the counterproductive nature of BLM and the welfare state

An excellent summary of Thomas Sowell’s views on how culture is a far more important explanation for poor black outcomes than racism

Thomas Sowell on the Current Black (redneck) Culture

Kimberly Klacik

Kimberly Klacik for Congress

Vernon Jones

Vernon Jones speaking at the RNC Convention in August 2020

Walter Williams

Walter Edward Williams (March 31, 1936 – December 1, 2020) was an American economist, commentator, and academic. Williams was the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University, as well as a syndicated columnist and author. Known for his classical liberal and libertarian views.

How much can we blame on slavery

A Tribute to Walter E Williams – Champion of Individual Liberty

John Deberry

John Deberry, a black state representative, speaking against violent protests in 2020 in Tennessee

Morgan Freeman

On “Black History Month”

If you don’t discriminate against white people, here are some politically incorrect views on racism from white scholars:

Jordan Peterson

Jordan Peterson is a Canadian clinical psychologist and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. Peterson entered the Grande Prairie Regional College to study political science and English literature. He later transferred to the University of Alberta, where he completed his B.A. in political science in 1982. Afterward, he took a year off to visit Europe, where he began studying the psychological origins of the Cold War; 20th-century European totalitarianism; and the works of Carl Jung, Friedrich Nietzsche, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and Fyodor Dostoevsky. He then returned to the University of Alberta and received a B.A. in psychology in 1984. In 1985, he moved to Montreal to attend McGill University. He earned his Ph.D. in clinical psychology under the supervision of Robert O. Pihl in 1991, and remained as a post-doctoral fellow at McGill’s Douglas Hospital until June 1993, working with Pihl and Maurice Dongier.

Jordan Peterson on how and why postmodernism must be fought

Jordan Peterson on white privilege and safe spaces

Jordan Peterson on how “diversity” activists are far more racist and sexist in their thinking than those who do not demand “diversity.”

Jordan Peterson on how “oppression” explains all unequal outcomes in society. And the crucial importance of individual sovereignty vs group identity.

Gad Saad

Gad Saad is a Canadian evolutionary psychologist at the John Molson School of Business (Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada) who applies evolutionary psychology to marketing and consumer behavior. As of 2020, he holds the Concordia University Research Chair in Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences and Darwinian Consumption, writes a blog for Psychology Today titled Homo Consumericus, and hosts a YouTube show named The Saad Truth. He obtained a B.Sc. (Mathematics and Computer Science) and M.B.A. from McGill University, and an M.S. and Ph.D. from Cornell University. Saad’s doctoral adviser was the mathematical and cognitive psychologist and behavioral decision theorist Edward Russo.

Gad Saad on why the “cancel culture” is dangerous and anti-liberal

Sam Harris

Sam Harris is an American author, philosopher, neuroscientist, and podcast host. His work touches on a wide range of topics, including rationality, religion, ethics, free will, neuroscience, meditation, psychedelics, philosophy of mind, politics, terrorism, and artificial intelligence. Harris came to prominence for his criticism of religion, and Islam in particular, and is described as one of the “Four Horsemen of Atheism”, along with Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett. His academic background is in philosophy and cognitive neuroscience. In 1997, at Stanford, he completed a B.A. degree in philosophy in 2000. Harris began writing his first book, The End of Faith, immediately after the September 11 attacks. He received a Ph.D. degree in cognitive neuroscience in 2009 from the University of California, Los Angeles, using functional magnetic resonance imaging to conduct research into the neural basis of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty. His thesis was titled The Moral Landscape: How Science Could Determine Human Values.

Sam Harris critiques Black Lives Matter

Heather Mac Donald

Heather Mac Donald is an American conservative political commentator, essayist and attorney. She is a Thomas W. Smith Fellow of the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of the institute’s City Journal. She has written numerous editorials and is the author of several books. She is an American conservative political commentator, essayist and attorney. She is a Thomas W. Smith Fellow of the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of the institute’s City Journal. She has written numerous editorials and is the author of several books.

Heather Mac Donald  on how the data proves that police are not racist

Heather Mac Donald on the Delusion of Diversity

Jonathan Haidt

Jonathan Haidt is an American social psychologist, Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University Stern School of Business, and author. His main areas of study are the psychology of morality and moral emotions. Haidt’s main scientific contributions come from the psychological field of moral foundations theory, which attempts to explain the evolutionary origins of human moral reasoning on the basis of innate, gut feelings rather than logical reason. The theory was later extended to explain the different moral reasoning and how they relate to political ideology, with different political orientations prioritizing different sets of morals. The research served as a foundation for future books on various topics. Haidt has written three books for general audiences, including: The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom (2006), which explores the relationship between ancient philosophies and modern science; The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion (2012), which examines how morality is shaped by emotion and intuition more than by reasoning, and why differing political groups have different notions of right and wrong; and The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure (2018), co-written with Greg Lukianoff, which explores the rising political polarization and changing culture on college campuses, and its effects on mental health. Haidt has attracted both support and criticism for his critique of the current state of universities and his interpretation of progressive values. He has been named one of the “top global thinkers” by Foreign Policy magazine, and one of the “top world thinkers” by Prospect magazine. He is among the most cited researchers in political and moral psychology, and is considered among the top 25 most influential living psychologists.

Jonathan Haidt on the rise of victimhood

Jonathan Haidt on Social Justice Warriors – Extremism on Diversity Leads to Violent Intolerance. Arguing by smearing people with ad hominem attacks such as “privilege”

Gender, Race, Culture video (not Haidt, but a number who get it):

Charlie Kirk

The myth and racism of “white privilege.”

The argument against socialized medicine or universal health care.

Kara Dansky

A feminist attacks transgender concept and “gender identity” term.

Victor David Hanson

On the reason we should distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants.

Countering Myths Propagated by the Fundamentalist Zombies on the Political Left

Excerpts from Don’t Burn This Book (2020), by Dave Rubin

Systemic Racism?

Great news for everyone except progressives – we are less racist than ever before! That’s according to the General Social Survey (GSS), which is run by the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center.

GSS repeatedly quizzed a vast sample of people with the same questions from 1972 onward and found a steady move toward tolerance. Initially, 15 percent of white respondents thought “black and white children should go to separate schools.” That figure dropped to 10 percent in the early 1980s and became a negligible amount by 1985 – so much so that GSS stopped asking the question…A more recent study conducted by Harvard University…is even more reassuring. It found both conscious and unconscious racial bias had “declined significantly” between 2007 and 2016…

Black people are 23.5 percent LESS likely to be shot by police, relative to whites. That’s according to ex-Harvard scholar Roland Fryer (a black dude, I might add). He…published in July 2017.

A year earlier, a Washington State University paper…found police were “three times LESS likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white suspects.”

Back in 2001, another study by The Washington Post found that police officers were more likely to be killed by black people, rather than vice versa. Specifically, it noted that blacks committed 43 percent of cop killings, despite being just 13 percent of the US population. Data from ProPublica (a center-left organization) found that 62 percent of black people shot by police between 2005 and 2009 were either resisting arrest or assaulting an officer.

David Klinger, a criminology professor at the University of Missouri-St Louis, studied more than 300 cops to find that “multiple” officers were disinclined to use deadly force against a black suspect – even when it was permitted.

Conversely, black offenders committed 52 percent of homicides in America between 1980 and 2008. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 93 percent of black victims were killed by other blacks, while 84 percent of white victims were killed by other whites.

…Nearly half of all black men who died in 2015 in the age group 15 to 24 died from homicide. In comparison, white men in the same age group died from homicide at a rate of approximately 8 percent. Their most likely cause of death? Unintended injuries from car accidents…

the US House of Representatives and Senate have never been more diverse. They currently have 116 lawmakers who are nonwhite, which is more than ever…

None of these facts mean that racism does not exist. It simply means the issue isn’t black and white, like the groupthink might suggest.

The “War” on Women

…we’re constantly told that today’s women are an oppressed class, trapped in as state of perpetual bondage…

….American women have never been more liberated in our country’s 244-year history…Women dominate universities in more than 100 countries…And nope, this isn’t a phenomenon exclusive to the west.

…In Panama, 53 percent of the entire female population go into higher education, compared to just 34 percent of men. In Malaysia, nearly 65 percent of university students are female. In Argentina, 98 percent of women have some form of higher education – nearly twice as many as their male counterparts. Similarly, Sri Lankan women outnumber guys in college by almost 2-to-1.

The numbers are similar in America…women made up more than 56 percent of college students nationwide in 2018. Across the pond… the UK [finds] that women were 36 percent more likely to apply to university than men in 2018 – a new record. This is not oppression.

Women are also much less likely to be victims of homicide. A 2013 study…found that nearly 80 percent of murder victims were male, not female. In fact, women are less likely to be victims of every crime, except rape and sexual assault.

Women get treated better online….men are the primary targets of threats (10 percent compared to 6 percent for women). Men are also twice as likely to be harassed for their political views (19 percent of men compared with 10 percent of women).

Similarly, half of all online trolls are women. A study…analyzed Twitter for three weeks. It found 6,500 different users were targeted by 10,000 “explicitly aggressive and misogynistic” tweets. Fifty percent of them were sent from females who used the terms slut and whore to describe other women.

Considering these facts about modern-day women, it’s just as easy to apply an oppression narrative to men as it is to apply it to women. In fact, recent data supports the idea that men are as oppressed, if not more oppressed, as women are.

More than 93.3 percent of federal inmates are male. This, in part, is because women enjoy the benefits of a criminal sentencing gap. Research…found that men are given much higher sentences (63 percent more) than women convicted of the same crimes in federal court. Women are also significantly more likely to avoid charges and convictions entirely, plus twice as likely to avoid prison if convicted – even if they have the same criminal background.

Meanwhile, American men have been forced to register for the Selective Service since 1980. Women are not.

When you look at the facts, women seem clearly better off. They even live longer lives. This is partly because of…Obamacare….which gave them preferential treatment. [Obamacare] had 134 references to “women’s health” but only two that were specific to men. Staggering stuff considering the average American man will live to age 76 while the average woman will live to age 81…

Women win custody of the child in more than 80 percent of all divorces. In 2010…nearly 14 million parents had primary custody of a child after separation – but only one in six were fathers.

…4,492 men died at work in 2015 (92.9 percent of the total) compared with just 344 women (7.1 percent of the total).

Wage Gap

There are two things that could survive a nuclear war: cockroaches and the myth of the gender pay gap.

Despite being debunked by countless economists (many of whom are women), it’s a statistical lie that never dies…

…the claim women earn 79 cents for every man’s dollar is pure spin. The figure is an aggregate one, which compares the median of all women’s earnings with the equivalent for all men, but this ignores job type, experience, and hours worked. When those factors are considered, the so-called gap disappears…

…men work longer hours. In 2017, men worked an average of 8.4 hours compared to 7.8 hours for women.

In 2009, the US Dept of Labor released a paper that examined more than 50 peer-reviewed studies and concluded that the wage gap could almost entirely be explained by the choices made by men and women – including what they studied in college.

In 2018, research conducted by [a] Georgetown University economist…showed that women took majors that led to lower-paying jobs (early childhood education, communication disorders sciences and services, and nursing), whereas men chose higher-paying subjects, such as computer science and math.

Women also make different life choices. They’re the only gender that can get pregnant…, so they frequently choose to start families and raise children….40 percent of women leave STEM fields – science, technology, engineering, and math – after starting a family. Just 23 percent of men do.

That said, young women who don’t have kids are outearning their male peers….unmarried, childless females under age 30 who live in cities earn 8 percent more than their male peers in 147 of 150 US cities. In Atlanta and Memphis, the figure is approximately 20 percent more, while young women in NYC, LA, and San Diego make 17 percent, 12 percent, and 15 percent more, respectively.

Excerpts from A Man’s Viewpoint (1998), by Rob Mazzeo:

* $11,200 goes to breast cancer research for every breast cancer death, compared to $2,300 going to prostate cancer research for each prostate cancer death. This is true even though only 12.5% of women get breast cancer during their lives, compared with 20% of men who get prostate cancer. Pg 14

* Jill Natwick Johnson was a corporate lawyer for 15 years, and was offered a promotion at twice her current salary… She turned it down. Instead, Natwick Johnson decided to leave the workforce and become a full-time mom. She made a choice that is available to almost all women, but rarely available to men… How many corporate attorney men do you know have the choice of leaving the workforce to go home and raise children while their wives provide financially for the family?… More than 54 percent of men in the Yankelovitch survey said they wanted to stay at home with their children. A majority of…men wanted to raise their children full time… Pg. 42

*Study after study shows that men occupy the most dangerous and the worst jobs. For example, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health listed high-risk professions in which people are killed the most. In all categories, men were 80 percent of the homicide victims, even though they are only 49 percent of the population. What does the population statistic have to do with job homicide? Nothing. I included it only to expose a typical trick that feminists use to portray women as victims. When feminists say, for example, that women are 51 percent of the population but only three percent of corporate CEOs, they imply that the percentages should be equal. They argue indirectly that 51 percent of corporate executives should be women to mirror population statistics. To balance this, why don’t feminists demand 51 percent representation in the riskiest and most dangerous job categories? Men dominate the top five most dangerous jobs in which people were victims of homicide…In all, 6,210 people, most of them men, died on the job site…Men are victims of 91 percent of all fatal work injuries, but are only 49 percent of the U.S. population…feminists regularly devalue the work men do. By focusing only on pay and not men’s risks, feminists can easily and wrongly claim that men oppress women. More women choose safer, and therefore lower-paying jobs. If more women chose to do the [more dangerous] work, women would earn as much as the “average” man. pp. 103-104

*A simple accusation. That is all it takes. A woman needs only to accuse a man of rape, and he is guilty. From that point on, he has the burden of proving his innocence. Meanwhile, that simple accusation can destroy his life. He can lose his job, his friends, his reputation. Subsequent women he meets, doubt him. Family and acquaintances ostracize him. He must spend money and hire a lawyer to prove his innocence. Rape lies turn the Constitution on its head. The man is guilty until proven innocent. Pg 198.

Excerpts from Stand Up for Your Manhood (2016), by Peter Lloyd

“…34.7 percent of male offenders were sentenced to immediate custody for offenses involving violence against a person compared to only 16.9 percent of women…44.9 percent of men went straight to prison for committing burglary compared to 26.6 percent of women, as well as 61.7 percent of male robbers compared to just 37.7 percent of female robbers.” pg. 207

“…if businesses actually could pay women 77 cents on the dollar [compared to men] for the same work, they’d just hire women. There would be no reason to ever hire men, but that clearly isn’t what’s happening,” says Isaac Cohen, Forbes journalist. pp. 205-6

“According to the Office for National Statistics, men don’t just lead in nine of the top ten killer diseases, including cancer, heart disease, stroke, pneumonia, diabetes, and cirrhosis of the liver…[men] also die five years earlier than women in a life expectancy gap that’s increased 400 percent since 1920.” pp. 246-7

“…[men] pay a whopping 70 percent of UK income tax…for every [dollar] spent on men’s health, [eight dollars] was spent on women’s…we live in a medical matriarchy…[In Australia], men’s health problems [are] allocated a quarter of the funding women’s research gets…[In the US], the Affordable Care Act…[has]…134 references to women’s health…but just two for [men], and even then they’re fleeting. You’ll find an entire chapter dedicated to breast cancer, yet prostate cancer isn’t even mentioned.” pp. 248-9

“…women are screened [in the UK] for breast cancer, ovarian and cervical cancer…the sobering reality [is] that there’s still no screening programme for prostate cancer, even though we know it kills four times as many men than cervical cancer does women…experts predict that in 20 years time prostate cancer will be the most common form of the disease – which is alarming considering only half the population have prostates.”  pg. 260

Exerpts from The New Color Line (1995), by Roberts and Stratton

“…Business Week featured a cover story, “White Male & Worried,” which reported on the growing resentments of white males over reverse discrimination. The article quoted a white male, who had been passed over by preferred minorities and women, lamenting his ‘wrong pigment, wrong plumbing.’ Corporate consultant Harris Sussman told Business Week that ‘White Male” is what I call the newest swear word in America.’ The magazine reported that Sussman’s own appearance at a corporate diversity seminar had been opposed by women and blacks because they saw no reason to ‘devote any time at all to white men.’…corporate managers’ evaluations, bonuses, and promotions depend on their success at meeting ‘diversity goals’ by hiring and promoting women and preferred minorities. Hughes Aircraft, for example, docked the bonuses of executives in two divisions by 10 percent because of bad grades on their ‘diversity report cards.’ Women and preferred minorities also received special access to management through various committees, which monitor workplace sensitivity and the advancements of women and preferred minorities.”, pg 133

“…Catherine Greer reported on ABC-TV’s 20/20 news program that U.S. Forest Service job postings for firefighting positions specified that ‘only unqualified applicants will be considered’ and that ‘only applicants who do not meet standards will be considered.’ This meant that jobs went to women, who filled 179 of 184 openings during the hiring period. Calling the policy ‘quota lunacy,’ Representative Wally Herger (R-CA) said, ‘It is not a civil right to land a job for which one is unqualified. This is ridiculous.’…To facilitate filling the quota, the Federal Aviation Administration issues a ‘diversity handbook’ for managers…According to the handbook, ‘the merit promotion process is but one means of filling vacancies, which need not be utilized if it will not promote your diversity goals.’ One FAA job announcement…said ‘Applicants who meet the qualification requirements…cannot be considered for this position…Only those applicants who do not meet the Office of Personnel Management requirements…will be eligible to compete.’…In other words, if you are qualified, you aren’t.” pg 141

“Gender quotas are even forcing universities to drop their football programs. As part of a discrimination settlement with the National Organization for Women, San Francisco State University terminated its football team…The school was guilty of having a higher proportion of female students than female athletes…Judge Raymond Pettine found that Brown University discriminated against women because the ratio of female to male athletes was not ‘substantially proportionate’ to the student body (women constituted 51 percent of the student body and 44 percent of the athletes). Brown’s percentage of female athletes…was unusually high. ‘Remember Brown is ahead of the game,’ Brown attorney Beverly Ledbetter warned, “if you think we have a problem, other schools are in big trouble.’” pg 142

“Female defendants have successfully used the ‘abusive male’ defense to escape punishment for sexually mutilating their husbands.” pg 144

“Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.” – Hillary Rodham Clinton, speech at the First Ladies’ Conference on Domestic Violence, El Salvador, November 17, 1998. Cited in The Second Sexism: Discrimination Against Men and Boys, by David Benatar.

Excerpts from The Myth of Male Power: Why Men Are the Disposable Sex (1993), by Warren Farrell

“A husband whose wife dies is about 10 times more likely to commit suicide than a wife whose husband dies.” pg 164

Unemployed men commit suicide at twice the rate of employed men. Among women, there is no difference in the rate of suicide based on whether or not the woman is employed.  pg 164

In the middle of the Great Depression, men were 650 percent more likely to commit suicide than women. pg 164

The suicide rate of adolescent boys has recently increased three times as quickly as the girls’.  pg 164

Just 20 years ago, young men (between 25 and 34) committed suicide at only twice the rate of young women; today, it is four times the rate. (Men’s rate increased 26 percent; women’s rate decreased 33 percent.) pg 164

Almost one out of three American men is a veteran. pg 122

In one WWI battle (the Battle of the Somme), more than one million men were killed or maimed. pg 122

“231,000 homeless men; 45,000 homeless women. 69,929 men dead from AIDS; 7,421 women dead from AIDS. 58,183 men’s names on Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial in D.C.; 8 women on same memorial. 2,267 men still MIA in Southeast Asia; 0 women still MIA. 758,294 men in prison; 46,230 women in prison.” pg 187

85 percent of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget devoted to nongender specific research, 10 percent of NIH budget devoted to women’s health, 5 percent of NIH budget devoted to men’s health. “In a search of more than 3,000 medical journals…23 articles were written on women’s healt for each one written on men’s. pg 189

“Men are more likely to suffer from mental illness; women are almost twice as likely to be treated for mental illness.” pg 191

For every woman who is murdered, three men are murdered. With the exception of rape, the more violent the crime, the more likely the victim is a man. Males are the primary victims of all violent crimes except rape. These violent crimes (excluding rape) have increased by 36 percent. Rape, the one violent crime in which females are the primary victim, has decreased by 33 percent. pg 214

A man convicted of murder is 20 times more likely than a woman convicted of murder to receive the death penalty. No woman who has killed only men has been executed in the US since 1954. Since the 1976 reinstatement of the death penalty, 120 men – and only one woman – have actually been executed. The woman, from North Carolina, said she preferred to be executed. In North Carolina, a man who commits second-degree murder receives a sentence on average of 12.6 years longer than a woman who commits second-degree murder. Approximately 1,900 women commit homicide in the US each year. pp 240, 244

When Tammy Faye Bakker divorced Jim, community property laws guaranteed Tammy Faye rights to half of the profits of their ministry. Why? Marriage makes a couple legal equals…Although Jim and Tammy Faye had equal rights to profits no matter what role she played, when the business got into trouble, Jim got 40 years in prison and Tammy Faye got none. Tammy Faye did not have to even show up in court.” pg 249

“If a man ignoring a woman’s verbal ‘no’ is committing date rape, then a woman who says ‘no’ with her verbal language but ‘yes’ with her body language is committing date fraud. And a woman who continues to be sexual even after she says ‘no’ is committing date lying. Do women still do this? Two feminists found the answer is yes. Nearly 40 percent of college women acknowledged they had said ‘no’ to sex even when they meant yes [ie, ‘no’ means ‘try harder’ for 40 percent of women, and that ‘no’ does NOT mean ‘no’ for those 40 percent]…Almost all single women acknowledge they have agreed to go back to a guy’s place ‘just to talk’ but were nevertheless responsive to his first kiss. And almost all acknowledge they’ve recently said something like, ‘That’s far enough for now,’ even as her lips are still kissing and her tongue is still touching his.” pg 314

“To my considerable chagrin, we found at least 60 percent of all the rape allegations were false.” Cited in The Myth of Male Power: Dr. Charles P. McDowell, Supervisory Special Agent, US Air Force, Office of Special Investigations

“The US Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that in job areas dominated by men, LESS qualified women could be hired. It did not allow less qualified men to be hired in areas dominated by women (e.g., elementary school teacher, nurse, secretary, cocktail waiting, restaurant host, office receptionist, flight attendant). The law also requires sex discrimination in hiring by requiring quotas…” pg 344

“Federal and state money subsidizes more than 15,000 women’s studies courses versus 91 men’s studies courses. Almost every state government uses taxpayer money to form Women’s Divisions with no parallel men’s divisions. Female ideology, initially opposed to male-only clubs in the areas of male dominance, soon supported female-only clubs in areas of female dominance…Like communism, feminism went from being revolutionary to dictating politically correct ideology. And, like communism, this political correctness was supported most strongly in the universities.” pg 345

“My family and I are voters of the ‘traditional Democratic constituency who have just become Republicans. The Democratic Party…has consistently: (1) favored discrimination against men in employment, university admissions, divorce, and child custody; (2) supported absurd laws (such as those on ‘marital rape’ and ‘sexual harassment’) which allow the conviction of innocent men on the sole basis of uncorroborated…accusations by women…The Democratic Party seems intent on reducing American men to second-class citizens.” Eric D. Sherman, cited in The Myth of Male Power, pg 347

“There are people out there who say men don’t marry because they’re immature or commitment-phobic…But they’re all wrong – men aren’t acting irresponsibly when they refuse to marry, they’re acting rationally…I can say this because I am a woman…the rewards for men in modern-day marriage and fatherhood are a lot less than they used to be, yet the cost and dangers are a lot higher. Who would want to sign up for that? Ultimately, these men know there’s a good chance they’ll lose their friends, their respect, their space, their sex life, their money and, if all goes wrong, their kids…Men aren’t wimping out by staying unmarried, they’re being smart. They don’t want to enter into a legal contract with somebody who could effecdtively take half their savings, pension and property when the honeymoon is over.” – Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood and the American Dream – and Why It Matters (2013), by Dr. Helen Smith

Excerpts from Not Guilty: In Defense of Men (1993), by David Thomas

“…in a 1991 poll, conducted among female students at the University of Texas’s psychology department…nearly 50 percent of all students admitted that they said “No” to sex when what they really meant was “Yes”, or “Maybe.” pg. 155

“…slightly more than half of all child abuse (53.3 percent, to be exact) is carried out by women…Suzanne Steinmertz, the chairwoman of the sociology department at the University of Indiana…has claimed that women are 62 percent more likely than men to abuse children and that boys are more than twice as likely as girls to receive physical injuries.” pg. 207

“In the twenty states surveyed there were 556 child fatalities as a result of maltreatment…The victim was male in 53.7 percent of cases…The perpetrator was on average 27.3 years old and was female in 55.7 percent of the cases.” pp. 208-09

Excerpts from Is There Anything Good About Men (2010), by Roy Baumeister

Almost never do couples report that the husband isn’t willing to have sex as often or in as many different ways as the wife wants. Almost always, the husband wants more. One research study tracked people who had been married for many years and asked them what their ideal amount of sex would be in a good marriage. Then it asked them how much sex they actually had. Wives reported that their ideal was almost exactly equal to the amount of sex they were having. To them, their married sex lives were essentially perfect, ideal, optimal. Their husbands said the ideal was about 50% more than they were getting. And these were happily married husbands… pg. 222

In the sinking of the Titanic, the richest men had a lower survival rate (34%) than the poorest women (46%). pg. 162

Review and Excerpts from Self-Made Man: One Woman’s Journey Into Manhood and Back Again (2006), by Norah Vincent

The female author opts to write a book about her experiences of being disguised as a man to find out what its like to be a man in our society. Like many women who envy the “benefits” of being a man, she expected to experience the pleasures, privileges, and power of being a man. Wasn’t it true that we live in a patriarchy where men have all the advantages, the power, and the privileges? That men are the oppressors and women are the oppressed? What she learned surprised her. She learned how very difficult it is to be a man, and could not wait to get back to being a woman.

“I thought dating was going to be the fun part, the easiest part…I could partake at last in the assumption of heterosexuality [the author is a lesbian] and ask out any woman I liked without insulting her. Of course, I was in for a mountain of rejections, and the self-hatred that came with being the sad sack pick-up artist, the wooing barnacle that every woman is forever flicking off her sleeve…As I would soon learn, that’s how it went for most guys…You were the eager athlete, the brightly colored bird doing the dance, and she was the German judge begrudging you the nod…[After being turned down by a woman at a bar] I felt like the outcast kid in the lunchroom who trips and dumps his tray on the linoleum in front of the whole school. Rejection sucked. ‘Rejection is a staple for guys, said Curtis [a male companion of the author at the bar]…’Get used to it.’ That was my first lesson in male courtship ritual. You had to take your knocks and knock again…This wasn’t some magic island in a beer commercial where all the ladies would light up for me if only I drank the right brew…Jesus, this really sucks. ‘Yeah, well, welcome to my world,’ said Curtis…I knew that my approach [to another woman in the bar]…would be perceived as a little pathetic and detestable…guy sidles up to cute chicks with a canned line and a huge hole of obvious insecurity gaping in the middle of his chest…I didn’t want to be that guy, the nuisance guy that women always dread. I was embarrassed for myself. But then how to retreat with dignity? I was already lurking awkwardly behind them, lamely pretending to flag down the bartender…the women turned to look at me, the way you do when something unremarkable enters your peripheral vision. Their eyes look at me like a billboard on the highway, running the length of me, then moving back to the point of interest elsewhere…At first the women looked [me] over like inferior produce at the supermarket. Then they smiled weakly…I was beginning to feel happier than ever to be a dyke. As a woman, it was a lot easier to meet women, because even in a dating situation there was always the common bond of womanhood…I found myself thinking about rejection and how small it made me feel, and how small most men must feel under the weight of what women expect from them…So how must men feel when it’s a true encounter and everything in the game seems stacked against them?…The guys step out (stupidly, it now seems to me)…saying something irreversible and frank – a compliment or an outright indication of interest – and most of the time the women step away, or laugh disdainfully, and the guys are left with their asses in the wind. That’s the sport, and men are the suckers. Women guard the gate and men storm it. Natural selection is brutal, and women do, in the immortal words of Jim Morrison, seem wicked when you’re unwanted. How do you handle all of this fucking rejection? I asked Curtis…’That’s the thing about being a guy,’ Curtis finished. ‘Rejection is part of the game. It’s expected.’” pp. 94-100.

“It was being found out as less than a real man, and I suspect that this is something a lot of men endure their whole lives, this constant scrutiny and self-scrutiny. Somebody is always evaluating your manhood. Whether it’s other men, other women, even children. And everybody is always on the lookout for your weaknesses or your inadequacy…And that, I learned very quickly, is the straightjacket of the male role, and one that is no less constrictive than its feminine counterpart. You’re not allowed to be a complete human being. Instead you get to be a coached jumble of stoic poses…Women were hard to please in this respect. They wanted me to be in control, baroquely big and strong both in spirit and in body, but also tender and vulnerable at the same time, subservient to their whims and bunny soft. They wanted someone to lean on and hold on to, to look up to a collapse beside, but someone who knew his reduced place in the postfeminist world nonetheless. They held their presumed moral and sexual superiority over me and at times tried to manipulate me with it.  pp. 276-77.

Men haven’t had their movement yet. Not really. Not intimately. And they’re due for it, as are the women who live with, fight with, take care of and love them. I, meanwhile, am staying right where I am: fortunate, proud, free and glad in every way to be a woman.  Pg. 287

Dom Nozzi summary of alleged sexism in America in recent decades: Dom says: Life is easy if you are a man…Unless you want to get accepted into a university, get child custody, get hired for a job, have your suicide rate be as low as it is for women, if you want to be treated better by cops or supervisors or doormen simply by dressing more attractively, live as long as a woman, get elected to office in large part for the reason that your gender is “correct,” if you want to avoid getting longer prison sentences due to your gender, if you want to avoid the threat of someday being drafted into fighting a war, if you want options for what you can wear in an office job, if you want options for life other than being the primary breadwinner, kid around w/ the opposite sex w/o worry of being labeled or feared as a predator, if you want to avoid being sexually harassed by someone who won’t face consequences, or avoid being told 24/7 by the media or people at parties that you are a shallow, sexist person suffering from “toxic masculinity” for the simple reason that you were born male…Men are bashed and ridiculed and sexually harassed by women 24/7 with zero consequences. Any man who tries that with women is crucified. Particularly outside the redneck culture. It is PC to mistreat men. It is unPC to do anything but respect women and serve all the needs and desires of women. 

A Collection of Videos Regarding the Myths of Alleged Sexism

Cassie Jaye, a feminist, made The Red Pill, a documentary offering a balanced look at the Men’s Rights Advocacy (MRA) groups. Feminists attempted to smear her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDxKBuSkoxY

Cassie interviewed by David Rubin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itSTzV29bS0

Example of media bias against men

False rape allegation

Christina Hoff Sommers on the Myth of the Gender Wage Gap

The Return of the Authoritarian Crusaders

By Dom Nozzi

A friend of mine was unfairly being censored by the New McCarthy-ites on Facebook recently. He was expressing views that were considered politically incorrect by the tribal “woke” zombies who have emerged within the political Left of the United States.

I have experienced a lot of what he described in my own conversations on Facebook with the Woke Zombies. It is scary and terribly disappointing — disappointing because much of it has come from people I formerly considered to be friends, and who I had formerly respected intellectually.

This growth in Zombie-ism exemplifies how societies in history have descended into murderous, cult-like, mob-like, tribal behavior and thinking. Salem witch hunting. Soviet-ism. The rise of Nazi Germany. The medieval Crusades. The Drug War. The War on Terrorism. The Red Scare. And on and on.

One of the most disappointing aspects of the woke/Social Justice Warrior/antifa tribalism is that this new authoritarianism is coming from the political Left – which has historically been where anti-authoritarian advocacy has been most prominent.

This form of secular religious zealotry is destroying individuals, friendships, marriages, and institutions. Those who have joined this crusade will — if they have any sense or any sense of shame — will one day regret having bought into this ruinous authoritarian ideology.

Evolution of My Political Views

By Dom Nozzi

I am today ashamed of the views I expressed when I was in college in the early 1980s. I walked away from the Democratic Party and its sickening, divisive, counterproductive, corrupt agenda and candidates in 2010 and have proudly been an Independent since then.

I believe Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump have been the three worst presidential candidates in US history, which is highly disturbing given how significant and pressing our societal problems have become. This portends a grim future.

I should add that I still consider myself on the political left, but a large number of secular religious fanatics (or what I sometimes call “regressives”) – who claim to be on the political Left — have hijacked what is now considered the Left in the US so that it includes an appalling collection of values that I find awful.

Dom Nozzi is a Classical Progressive, and Not On the Regressive Left

By Dom Nozzi

There has been an ideological split on the political left in America in recent times. Many who call themselves “progressive” are actually politically regressive, as I show below. I want no part of that way of thinking.

I am a classical progressive. I believe in…

• Fairness (no double standards) and liberty (as long as you are not hurting others).
• Doing to others what I would have them do to me.
• The welfare and sustainability of the individual, family, neighborhood, community, and nation.
• On military issues, I am a strong anti-interventionist and oppose all wars unless the US is being attacked on US soil and we must defend ourselves. I believe the military budget should be cut at least 90-95 percent. The US should end all of its many wars (which are nearly always wars of aggression), and eliminate all of its approximately 1,000 military bases around the world.
• On criminal justice, I am strongly in favor of rehabilitation rather than retribution for the incarcerated. We need to make all drugs legal.
• I am strongly pro-abortion and pro-gay rights.
• On religion, I strongly believe churches should not be tax-exempt, and that most all religion-based laws should be repealed.
• I strongly support forever ending road and highway widening. I strongly support narrowing a great many existing roads and highways, and strongly support instituting road and highway tolling on a large number of roadways and highways. I support a higher gas tax.
• I strongly support compact, higher-density, mixed-use development.
• I strongly oppose the death penalty.
• I strongly oppose US support for Israel – particularly financial.
• I strongly oppose the massive federal subsidies for corn (and Big Ag).
• I strongly support substantially increased transit funding – particularly for the purpose of restoring high-quality national passenger rail.
• I oppose NAFTA, TPP and other agreements that hurt the working class in the US.
• I support far more school choice so that parents are much better able to choose private schools over failing, indoctrinating public schools.
• I support a reform of nutrition guidelines to promote health and drastically reduce obesity. This means that guidelines promote low-carb, high-fat diets.
• I strongly support more strict regulations for Wall Street and Freddie May/Fannie Mac.
• I strongly believe that all US cities must drastically cut its funding of bloated police and fire departments.
• I support free speech – including speech that I disagree with.
• I support making people happy rather than motor vehicles.
• I support methods that build sustainable and successful adults, families, neighborhoods, communities, and nation.
• I believe we should reward individuals based on merit, not group identity.
• I support Martin Luther King’s call for equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome.
• Education and science are extremely valuable, admirable, and essential for success for individuals and the community. Individuals should be taught to enjoy engaging in self-education for life.
• Whites or males are not guilty of injustices that may have been engaged in by ancestors long ago. “Original sin” is patently unfair, in other words.
• I reject Marxist economics and what some call “cultural Marxism” (the ideas of group identity, group merit, group guilt, and splitting humans into “oppressors” or “oppressed”).
• Civilized behavior is essential. Laws, and civil behavior, correctly speaking the language of the nation you live in, civilized dress, and personal hygiene are not “racist” or an “attack on diversity.” Abandoning such cultural rules and laws leads to barbarism.

I have held the thoughts expressed in the above list for much of my life (mostly created by what I have experienced in my life, what I have been taught, and what I have read). These views are not because of “indoctrination” or “drinking the Kool-Aid” or “alien abduction.”

The Regressive Left

It is extremely important for me to point out that my views above generally represent the classical, long-standing positions of the politically progressive left.

There is a newly emerging and starkly distinct political left as I write this in 2020. This is a crusading, righteous, intolerant political left that has lost its mind and is more accurately called the regressive left – a version that is giving the classical progressive viewpoint a black eye because many confuse the two with being one in the same.

The views held by me and others on the classical progressive left are nearly the opposite of today’s regressive left. Members of the regressive left are often referred to as “social justice warriors” or “woke” or “antifa.”

The regressive left, in contrast to the progressive left, tends to take the following stances…

• Separating us into competing, divisive, antagonistic groups (“oppressors” and “oppressed”) rather than evaluating us as individuals.
• Demanding equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity. Inequality of outcome is, by definition, a sure sign of discrimination and oppression.
• “Oppressor” individuals should be canceled, shamed, shouted down, censored, insulted, assaulted, and have their reputation and career destroyed.
• Safe spaces are necessary on public school campuses because certain words or ideas are “dangerous.”
• Words can cause physical violence to the “oppressed.”
• Unfair advantages such as affirmative action, “diversity” efforts, and welfare should be given to individuals who are members of “oppressed” groups based not on merit, but simply skin color, gender, or sexuality.
• Anyone who does not fully buy into the wokester secular religious dogma is a fascist.
• Diversity of skin color, gender, or sexuality is by definition always good and always necessary. Diversity of thought is not.
• Authoritarian, bullying, violent actions by such groups as Antifa are righteous and opposed to fascism – in the same Orwellian way that black is white.
• Masculinity is toxic and sexuality is dangerous. Men should be neutered eunuchs. A sex-negative attitude is politically correct and women should not dress in a sexually appealing way, as this “objectifies” them. Women can tell sexual jokes or fondle and kiss men they are not in a relationship with. Men, however, cannot do these things.
• It is acceptable to discriminate against white men.
• “Reparations” are an appropriate way to correct historical wrongs committed by “oppressor” groups.
• Whites or males are forever guilty of the “original sin” of what their ancestors may have done long ago to “oppress” members of “oppressed” groups.
• Science and education are to be distrusted because it is “white,” “western,” “male supremacist” or “patriarchal.” There are better ways to know “truth,” and this “knowledge” can only come from “oppressed” people such as blacks, women, or sexual minorities.

In sum, I am a proud member of the classical progressive left, and have no allegiance with or sympathy for the regressive left I describe above. It is an agenda of intolerant, authoritarian, unfair regressiveness rather than progressiveness. Of all the political affiliations in existence today, the regressive left is the most dangerous. The most worthy of disdain.

On the Politics of Free Speech

By Dom Nozzi

On February 23, 2020, Chris Matthews, a broadcaster with MSNBC, was facing calls to resign after he compared Bernie Sanders’ victory in the Nevada caucus to the Nazi invasion of France.

Several friends of mine on the political Left responded by angrily demanding that Matthews be fired.

I responded with the following.

Much as I utterly despise this statement from Matthews, I’m struggling with whether it is appropriate for progressives to call for the firing of someone for outlandish comments. If Phil Donahue or Michael Moore were broadcasters for CNN/MSNBC, should we call for their being fired if they stated something that was anti-war because their anti-war statement was highly offensive? Doesn’t free speech, in other words, require us to protect speech we find outrageously offensive?

Side note: I was ashamed of progressives in Gainesville FL recently (a city I lived in for 20 years) when they called for stopping the Milo Yiannopoulos speech at the University of Florida in Gainesville. Side note two: I can think of several instances where progressive statements since the 60s have been shut down by the Right for being deemed offensive.

I get very worried when I see a growing number of instances in recent decades where the Left become censors or red-baiting McCarthy-ites.

I have a small bit of sympathy for the idea that if I own a company I should have the right to shut down speech by one of my employees for saying something I find offensive. But this is different from the government or political groups doing such a thing.

The response from a few friends was to point out that Matthews comments were so exceptionally insensitive and outrageous that it is right to call for his resignation.

I then said the following.

I speak as someone who spent years as an atheist activist. I and many others in that area of activism were regularly told that it is outrageous and highly offensive to speak against the Christian god or hurt the feelings of Christian or Jewish or Muslim believers.

“How dare you, Dom Nozzi, attack our god! These are our sincerely held beliefs!” Those on the Right are, I can assure you, just as outraged by the “insensitivity” or “outrage” of atheists or anti-war activists in the 60s as are those on the Left who are outraged by Matthews. “My son died fighting for your freedom in Vietnam!,” cry many on the Right. “How dare you spit on his grave!” “My daughter is dying of cancer! How dare you take away her lingering hope of eternal salvation by attacking her loving god!” “You feminists are denigrating my mother for her hard work as a stay-at-home mom!” “My father died in a Nazi gas chamber in WWII! How dare you claim that his Jewish god did not exist!” “When my sister was a child, she was sexually abused by our father! How dare you claim that religion is a form of child abuse!”

Atheists throughout history have been censored to this day by those who were ENRAGED by the thought of hearing highly “insensitive, offensive speech” from an atheist. Many atheists have been censored by all levels of government for wanting the right to speak at the same events where Christians have been able to speak about their Christian beliefs. There are laws on the books to this day in many US states that prohibit atheists from having civil rights that non-atheists take for granted. Let’s not forget how many atheists have been tortured and killed throughout history for having the audacity to give a public speech.

I firmly believe that in any society that wishes to be considered to have freedom and justice for all, it is the speech that we most hate that is in most need of protection. Whether that is protection from government or protection from book-burning citizens.

Most Calls for Censorship These Days Come from the Political Left

All over the nation over the past decade or so, students on the political Left have shouted down views they consider “hurtful” or “microaggression” or “insensitive to minorities.” I’m sorry, but I agree with Anthony Kennedy – whose views I almost always sicken me — when he said that “The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true,” Kennedy wrote. “This is the ordinary course in a free society. The response to the unreasoned is the rational; to the uninformed, the enlightened; to the straight-out lie, the simple truth.”

I also agree with First Amendment expert Greg Lukianoff and social psychologist Jonathan Haidt in their book, The Coddling of the American Mind, when they wrote that “Something has been going wrong on many college campuses in the last few years. Speakers are shouted down. Students and professors say they are walking on eggshells and are afraid to speak honestly. Rates of anxiety, depression, and suicide are rising. How did this happen, the authors ask?

Lukianoff and Haidt show how the new problems on campus have their origins in three terrible ideas that have become increasingly woven into American childhood and education: “What doesn’t kill you makes you weaker; always trust your feelings; and life is a battle between good people and evil people. These three Great Untruths contradict basic psychological principles about well-being and ancient wisdom from many cultures.  Embracing these untruths—and the resulting culture of safetyism—interferes with young people’s social, emotional, and intellectual development. It makes it harder for them to become autonomous adults who are able to navigate the bumpy road of life.”

According to Lukianoff and Haidt, “In June, a professor protecting himself with a pseudonym wrote an essay for Vox describing how gingerly he now has to teach. “I’m a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me,” the headline said. A number of popular comedians, including Chris Rock, have stopped performing on college campuses… Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Maher have publicly condemned the oversensitivity of college students…”

I learned from a friend that a history professor, in 2020, felt obligated to submit an anonymous letter to his colleagues at UC Berkeley to express his honest feelings about blacks and racism for fear that his politically left-of-center department would ruin his career if he signed his name to the letter.

“Two terms have risen quickly from obscurity into common campus parlance,” report Lukianoff and Haidt. “Microaggressions are small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless. For example, by some campus guidelines, it is a microaggression to ask an Asian American or Latino American “Where were you born?,” because this implies that he or she is not a real American. Trigger warnings are alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response. For example, some students have called for warnings that Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart describes racial violence and that F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby portrays misogyny and physical abuse, so that students who have been previously victimized by racism or domestic violence can choose to avoid these works, which they believe might ‘trigger’ a recurrence of past trauma.”

I believe that a big part of what Matthews – at the beginning of this blog — was leveraging is something I call the Media Outrage and Terrify Machine.

Speaking as a political progressive, I am disgusted and alarmed by how the media has leveraged the Outrage and Terrify Machine to promote money-making “click bait” and viewership for the media. The media has learned that there is a lot of money to be made in running news that is at least partly designed to have us utterly hate and be utterly outraged by actions of the other side of the political fence. Political divisiveness, thanks importantly to the mainstream media Outrage and Terrify Machine, has now become so extreme that polls show a big rise in the number of people who want to commit physical violence against those they don’t agree with politically.

The strong negative emotions elicited by the Outrage and Terrify Machine has caused a great many to lose their

All over the nation over the past decade or so, students on the political left have shouted down views they consider “hurtful” or “microaggression” or “insensitive to minorities.”

I’m sorry, but I agree with Anthony Kennedy – whose views almost always sicken me — when he said that “The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true,” Kennedy wrote. “This is the ordinary course in a free society. The response to the unreasoned is the rational; to the uninformed, the enlightened; to the straight-out lie, the simple truth.”

I also agree with First Amendment expert Greg Lukianoff and social psychologist Jonathan Haidt in their book, The Coddling of the American Mind, when they wrote that “Something has been going wrong on many college campuses in the last few years. Speakers are shouted down. Students and professors say they are walking on eggshells and are afraid to speak honestly. Rates of anxiety, depression, and suicide are rising. How did this happen, the authors ask?

Lukianoff and Haidt show how the new problems on campus have their origins in three terrible ideas that have become increasingly woven into American childhood and education: “What doesn’t kill you makes you weaker; always trust your feelings; and life is a battle between good people and evil people. These three Great Untruths contradict basic psychological principles about well-being and ancient wisdom from many cultures.  Embracing these untruths—and the resulting culture of safetyism—interferes with young people’s social, emotional, and intellectual development. It makes it harder for them to become autonomous adults who are able to navigate the bumpy road of life.”

According to Lukianoff and Haidt, “In June, a professor protecting himself with a pseudonym wrote an essay for Vox describing how gingerly he now has to teach. “I’m a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me,” the headline said. A number of popular comedians, including Chris Rock, have stopped performing on college campuses… Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Maher have publicly condemned the oversensitivity of college students…”

I learned from a friend that a history professor, in 2020, felt obligated to submit an anonymous letter to his colleagues at UC Berkeley to express his honest feelings about blacks and racism for fear that his politically left-of-center department would ruin his career if he signed his name to the letter.

“Two terms have risen quickly from obscurity into common campus parlance,” report Lukianoff and Haidt. “Microaggressions are small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless.

For example, by some campus guidelines, it is a microaggression to ask an Asian American or Latino American “Where were you born?,” because this implies that he or she is not a real American.

Trigger warnings are alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response. For example, some students have called for warnings that Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart describes racial violence and that F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby portrays misogyny and physical abuse, so that students who have been previously victimized by racism or domestic violence can choose to avoid these works, which they believe might ‘trigger’ a recurrence of past trauma.”

I believe that a big part of what Matthews – at the beginning of this blog — was leveraging is something I call the Media Outrage and Terrify Machine.

I am disgusted and alarmed by how the media has leveraged the Outrage and Terrify Machine to promote money-making “clickbait” and viewership for the media. The media has learned that there is a lot of money to be made in running news that is at least partly designed to have us utterly hate and be utterly outraged by the actions of the other side of the political fence. Political divisiveness, thanks importantly to the mainstream media Outrage and Terrify Machine, has now become so extreme that polls show a big rise in the number of people who want to commit physical violence against those they don’t agree with politically.

The strong negative emotions elicited by the Outrage and Terrify Machine has caused a great many to lose their minds.

minds.

The Failed Strategy of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party

By Dom Nozzi

September 12, 2017

Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump in November 2016 was a shock to a great many citizens in America.

There are a number of reasons why it happened.

Perhaps the most important was that Clinton almost exclusively highlighted her center-right politics. Those politics included corporatism, militarism, being tough-on-crime, a disdain for single-payer health care, and a disdain for or ignorance of middle class/blue collars.

She wrongly assumed that even though she had nothing to offer progressives or women, progressives and women would be forced to vote for her because Trump was utterly deplorable.

Unfortunately for all of us on the left, this approach (and that of the Democratic National Committee) delivered a Trump win, as many Obama supporters voted for Trump, too few of the suburban center-right voters she wooed voted for her, more white women voted for Trump rather than Clinton, and many progressives either stayed home or voted Third Party.

In her recent book – What Happened — as in her 2016 campaign, she smears progressives and Bernie Sanders, rather than admitting that much of the fault was her own. She had almost no policies to draw voters on the left, so all she had to work with during her campaign was smearing the left, attacking Trump and his “deplorable” supporters, and blaming others.

Clinton may have been the worst major party nominee ever. After all, she lost to someone who was an incompetent clown that was one of the most hated candidates ever. Clinton was one of the few who were even more hated than Trump.

Since early in the 2016 campaign, Republican primary opponents and nearly all Democrats (including Clinton) have assumed that the key to victory was to attack and ridicule Trump 24/7. That strategy backfired because many hear the criticism as being untrue or unfair.

Unless the Democratic National Committee acknowledges that the Democratic Party has become corrupt, uninspiring, vague, war-mongering, and a nothing sandwich in need of significant reform, the future of the Democratic Party will continue to be grim.

Continuing to single-mindedly attack Trump and not clean its own Democratic Party house will ensure that Trump is re-elected to a second term in 2020.