Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 5, 2022 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor

59:49

‘It’s Triggering’

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, wherever you are all around the world, welcome to Radio Renaissance.
	I'm Jared Taylor, and with me is my indispensable co-host, as usual, Paul Kersey.
	And we begin with comments from listeners.
	Here's a quite a nice one.
	Dear sirs, Taylor and Kersey, and not forgetting the White AdvoCat.
	I hadn't heard it referred to as the White AdvoCat, but yes.
	Yeah!
	I write to you to commend your consistently cool-headed, coherent, and straightforward approach to the often infuriating issues you cover.
	I first heard of you, Mr. Taylor, when I was in university, and your name would be held up as an example of a racist nutjob and irrational hater.
	I seem to get that treatment a lot.
	Rational hater.
	Irrational.
	Irrational.
	Yep.
	Unlike a rational hater, I decided to search YouTube for any video interviews, admittedly, so as to gloat at a bad person getting his comeuppance.
	As I watched, I assumed I would see many examples of hate, illogic, and incompetence.
	Instead, I was truly humbled.
	In video after video, you came across as sane, calm, intelligent, and with worldly experience, often quite the contrast to your many different interviewers.
	This isn't to say that I agree with you on every point.
	However, it is to say that your style of calm and collected conversation, not to mention concise arguments and well-sourced evidence, made all the difference to this man who would have once considered himself your foe by warmest wishes from across the pond.
	So, this is a subject of her Britannic majesty, I assume.
	Now, second comment.
	I wish to refer To the four-year-old girl murdered by her grandmother and mother using alcohol as a poison.
	You remember that horrible story?
	The story you almost didn't want to hear.
	No, I didn't want to hear.
	I didn't want to talk about it.
	And that's the point.
	This listener says, Mr. Taylor naturally was very uncertain as to whether it was appropriate to bring this crime of depravity to the attention of podcast listeners.
	Truly, it was so bizarrely horrible as to be, in the end, impossible for me to imagine that a parent would do such a thing.
	Nonetheless, I regret to say that such crimes should be presented to AMRAN listeners.
	It gives, once again, testimony to the barbaric natures of certain of our fellow residents.
	Again and again, one has to conclude that it is undesirable for whites and Africans to coexist in the same society.
	That, of course, was Thomas Jefferson's point of view.
	That was Abraham Lincoln's point of view.
	Ugliest such incidents are skeptical listeners must see the evidence of how Africans live in a society built by whites.
	So, I don't know.
	I still feel very bad about stories like that.
	My criterion is this.
	If there's some sort of horrible thing that's going on, I ask myself, can we imagine white people doing this?
	Now, I suppose you can imagine anything.
	You've said that before, and it's true.
	People can do horrible things to other people.
	Yes, they can.
	Regardless of race.
	But in this case, this is one that, both of us being fathers, you think, oh my goodness, you're kids.
	Come on.
	And I guess for those who are not, well, I guess we have to repeat the facts.
	This is a four-year-old daughter who was alcohol poisoned by her grandmother as her mother watched on as punishment for having taken a sip of whiskey.
	They made her drink the rest of the whole bottle of whiskey.
	Four-year-old whiskey, a four-year-old girl.
	Four-year-old black girl, yeah.
	Yes, more than half full.
	Anyway, let's hope there will never be another such story.
	Okay, moving on to the events of the week.
	Elon Musk continues to be in the news.
	I guess that guy, I guess we can sort of anticipate he will never be out of the news, at least not for quite some time.
	Still again, the richest man on the planet is an African-American.
	Every time he moves a muscle, that's news.
	But there was an article in today's New York Times, May 5th, This title, the title alone is just rich.
	Elon Musk left a South Africa that was rife with misinformation and white privilege.
	White privilege and misinformation.
	Wow, South Africa was just rife, rife with misinformation.
	And of course now it has all the correct information and is replete with black privilege.
	And no one can talk about what it looks like.
	And it's just so much more wonderful, right?
	Everything about it is so good now that it's well informed rather than being misinformed.
	Now, the article is by two black people, of course.
	I just mentioned that in passing.
	Now, let us quote from this article.
	Mr. Musk has not talked much in public about a significant swath of his past, how growing up as a white person under the racist apartheid system in South Africa may have shaped him.
	That's the racist apartheid system.
	Mr. Kurzy, not the other one.
	Okay.
	This is the racist apartheid system they have in South Africa.
	Do these people even proofread?
	Interviews with relatives and former classmates reveal an upbringing in elite segregated white communities that were littered with anti-black government propaganda and detached from the atrocities that white political leaders inflicted on the black majority.
	Littered with anti-black government propaganda.
	His suburban communities were largely shrouded in misinformation.
	Well, praise the Lord, Mr. Kersey, you and I live in a country in which we have the beacon of the New York Times.
	Not one bit of misinformation in this country is there.
	What's the New York Times' slogan?
	We know the Washington Post is democracy dies in darkness.
	All the news that's Fit to print.
	All the news that's fit to print.
	That's right, and they live up to that motto every day.
	Elon Musk, of course, as we can tell from that headline, Mr. Taylor, was reared in an unfit society.
	Unfit indeed, unfit indeed.
	Now, I say, he said his suburban communities were largely shrouded.
	I mean, that seems like an odd thing, shrouded, in any case, in misinformation.
	And here's an example, or here are the only examples of misinformation.
	I was looking for misinformation.
	I like sort of dissecting misinformation.
	Because, you know, we're always accused of misinformation, but nobody ever tells us exactly what we said that's wrong.
	Well, misinformation, disinformation, etc.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Those are interchangeable words.
	Yes, but they say, no, these guys are just full of misinformation.
	Well, give me an example.
	Where has Mr. Kersey got it wrong?
	That's what I want to know.
	Well, here's misinformation.
	Sometimes newspapers arrived on doorsteps with whole sections blacked out.
	I mean, I wonder if that's even true.
	Is somebody in some office in the apartheid central blacking out whole sections of newspapers?
	I don't believe it.
	I frankly don't.
	You could ask Dan Root, who you did that wonderful interview with.
	Yes.
	And then, that's one example of misinterpretation.
	Nightly news bulletins ended with the national anthem and an image of the national flag flapping as the names of white young men who were killed fighting for the government scrolled on the screen.
	Is that disinformation?
	Sounds like a pretty patriotic country.
	It sure does.
	I mean, did they invent these names?
	What's this?
	I mean, that was during the Angolan War, probably.
	And so they were fighting the Cubans up there in Angola.
	In any case, these two black authors at New York Times continue.
	Classmates at two high schools he attended described him as a loner.
	Uh-oh.
	He's a loner.
	He's a loser.
	None offered recollections of things he said or did that revealed his views on the politics of the time.
	So wait.
	I have to ask a question.
	Yes.
	They tracked down as many of his former co-students.
	Yes.
	And because I remember, ladies and gentlemen, this is the New York Times.
	This has been, this is going to be the first of many pieces on Moss to try and... Oh yes.
	Sniff any racism or any of that, you know, fragrance of apartheid.
	As I sniffed and sniffed and sniffed all through his Wikipedia entry and his quotations, I don't think he's ever been accused of racism, not publicly.
	I've read his book, a book that came out about him.
	I can't remember the tech reporter who did it.
	The only thing that you could say, and we talked about it last week, maybe the week prior, is that Tesla or SpaceX or the Boring Company has never divulged, Mr. Taylor, the racial percentage of employees.
	Well, then guilty as charged.
	In any case, they found his classmates at the two high schools he attended.
	They rooted around and talked to his neighbors.
	Oh yeah, this is like a security clearance.
	Now, they described that none offered recollections of things he said or did that revealed his views on the politics of the time.
	But, and I'm rather surprised that the New York Times concedes this, black schoolmates recall that he spent time with black friends.
	And Pretoria Boys High, that was sort of a fancy high school, had a socially progressive undercurrent.
	The school's headmaster had participated in freedom struggle activities.
	Some students would travel to anti-apartheid gatherings.
	And Asher Mashudu, He was a classmate.
	Mr. Mashoudou was killed in a car accident in 1987, and a cousin said he remembered Elon Musk being one of only a handful of white people who attended the funeral in the family's rural village, adding, it was unheard of at that time.
	So, he sounds like, if anything, he was rather more open to blacks, but we're still supposed to assume that he was deformed by living in South Africa.
	Now, here's more.
	Here's more from the article.
	The specter of apartheid was imbued in the culture.
	And this is the very next sentence.
	So we're expecting to see how the specter of apartheid was imbued in the culture.
	Like many other schools of that era, there was a cadet program that groomed boys for military service.
	That's the specter of apartheid.
	So I guess when we had ROTC programs, R-O-T-C, in colleges and even some high schools, that was the specter of Jim Crow.
	I guess you didn't realize that.
	I did not.
	No.
	Then it goes on to say, and this is...
	This is the New York Times, remember.
	This is our newspaper of record.
	Some who knew Mr. Musk from his young days in South Africa said people should not discount the evolution he could have gone through once he left apartheid and South Africa behind.
	Can you imagine that?
	Can you imagine that?
	I mean, the assumption, of course, is when he was living there, he was this horrible, frothing racist.
	Maybe he's changed.
	Maybe he's changed.
	Why did they just attack him for having seven white kids?
	Maybe eight.
	I think he actually has eight white children.
	Has he?
	Well, I mean, he grew up in South Africa.
	I mean, that's just ipso facto.
	I remember there was some Twitter lady, black, who just called him an apartheid houseplant.
	Joy Reid.
	It's one of the ones who had that website where she had all sorts of anti-gay posts.
	I think that's Joy Reid.
	I think it is.
	I think she just came flat out and called him a white supremacist.
	There's no, you know?
	But just being white, that's all it takes.
	Now, going a little further on the anti-Musk campaign here, 26 NGOs and advocacy groups have written a letter expressing concern about his purchase of Twitter.
	Elon Musk's takeover of Twitter will further toxify our information ecosystem and be a direct threat to public safety.
	People are going to die.
	And this is addressed to potential advertisers.
	And they've got it all figured out.
	Under Musk's management.
	Twitter risks becoming a cesspool of misinformation with your brand attached.
	Uh-oh.
	Tide.
	You know, you're supposed to be washing things clean.
	You're going to be swimming in a cesspool of misinformation.
	And it will pollute our information ecosystem.
	What's an information ecosystem, by the way?
	In a time where trust in institutions and news media is already at an all-time low.
	I wonder why it's at such an all-time low.
	Musk himself responded to the letter asking who funded these groups.
	And, believe it or not, the Daily Mail.
	The Daily Mail does great things.
	And this is what they're so scared of.
	Musk actually responds to it.
	And he just says, wait a second, who's behind these guys?
	What shadowy cabal is behind this?
	Where's the money coming from?
	Well, the Daily Mail took the trouble.
	And it concluded, and if you wish, you can go to the Daily Mail and get the details, but they said, it's an assortment of dark money groups, such as George Soros' Open Society Foundation, NGOs founded by former Clinton and Obama administration staffers, wealthy Democrat donors and their family foundations, labor unions, and the governments of several European nations.
	Some of the groups, there were 26 of them, I didn't recognize that many, but there's something called Media Matters for America.
	They actually keep an eye on us.
	They write about you and me, Mr. Kersey.
	Really?
	Just how awful we are.
	Then there's the National Hispanic Media Coalition, the Women's March, You know who they are.
	They're the ones who walk around wearing what they themselves call pussy hats.
	The little pink hats with ears.
	Then the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism.
	Well, there you go.
	They're already warning advertisers.
	Sink Twitter.
	So there you go.
	Now, on the final question of censorship, I would like to quote from an article at American Renaissance, which was written by our Director of Special Projects, Chris Roberts.
	And he says this, since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, big tech has censored not just pro-Russia outlets, but leftist media that blame the conflict on American imperialism through NATO expansion.
	This week, that censorship expanded to include financial de-platforming.
	PayPal stopped working with the Consortium News and Mint Press News.
	Consortium News was founded by a number of distinguished journalists.
	Correct, correct.
	And this guy, he's a socialist, an outspoken, self-avowed socialist.
	Branko Marchetic wrote this for Jacobin.
	Jacobin is a very lefty author.
	But those are kind of smart boys.
	They're smart lefties.
	It's interesting and entertaining to read them.
	The Socialist writes this.
	This is a frightening attack on press freedoms.
	Faceless tech bureaucrats have unilaterally cut two serious independent media outlets off from a vital source of funding with no prior warning, no ability to appeal, and no explanation besides a vague reference to potential risk.
	And I know in at least one case, they said they'd hold the money for at least six months and then they might decide afterwards to just keep it.
	That's very arbitrary.
	It was five figures, right?
	It was like $17,000.
	Yes.
	And they were going to hold it for at least six months and then maybe just keep it as damages.
	Wow.
	Well, I mean, okay, I do sympathize, because after all, after all, American Renaissance and I personally got the boot in 2017.
	That was five years before these poor dears got it.
	Was that after a certain event in a certain Virginia city?
	After a certain event in a certain Virginia city.
	But the lefties never worried about us.
	Oh, no, no.
	I'm sure they didn't mind in the slightest.
	But this is, of course, something that us and everybody should be together on.
	I don't want lefties being censored either.
	They don't seem to care when we are censored, but I don't want them censored.
	But, and I think this is also quite significant, nobody on the right, as far as I can tell, Breitbart or National Review or Daily Caller, seems to have noticed this deplatforming.
	As I say, we notice, we care, because we have principles.
	And we care every time anybody gets deplatformed, no matter what the political point of view.
	And I'm very disappointed that not more people have talked about this.
	What's fascinating, and this is just gonna be a brief little side, it's just breaking right now, Mr. Taylor, that U.S.
	intelligence helped Ukraine sink The Russian cruiser, the Moskva.
	Yes.
	The NBC News is breaking that.
	Yes, I heard that.
	I mean, this is a proxy war, basically.
	The United States is fighting.
	And now you're banning people who are trying to report a different version of what we're being told by a government that now has a, what, a misinformation?
	I'm sorry.
	I think it's disinformation.
	Disinformation, misinformation, whatever words you want to use.
	Very Orwellian.
	I mean, this is such a...
	It's so bizarre, the past three months, the past... Let's take that back.
	The past two years, this is the two-year anniversary of the month of the George Floyd riots that completely changed the face of the United States, and for that matter, the world.
	And I encourage everybody to go back and read Mr. Taylor's essay, A World Gone Mad?
	Was that the title?
	Whatever, if it wasn't the title, it should have been the title.
	Yeah, I mean... Since May 25, So many things.
	I think May 25th.
	I mean, people write about how September 11th, after that changed everything.
	I mean, you can make a similar argument about May 25th.
	Nothing changed after September 11th!
	No!
	Come on!
	Well, I mean, you had to go through TSA.
	That was a big change.
	In any case, Mr. Courage of the Bald is now in your court, and you are going to talk to us of racist algorithms.
	I am going to, but first I want to make sure that all of our listeners, we're going to do this in the middle of the podcast, to make sure that if you guys have any stories, any criticisms, any corrections, or if you just want to say, hey, we love the podcast and join the newsletter, contact us.
	Because we live here.
	at protonmail.com.
	Once again, all one word because we live here at protonmail.com or you can come straight to American Renaissance at amren.com, a-m-r-e-n.com and click on the contact us tab.
	So, Algorithms.
	Algorithms.
	Here's the headline.
	Report.
	Algorithm that screens for child neglect disproportionately flags black families.
	For family law attorney Robin Frank, defending parents at one of their lowest points when they risk losing their children has never been easy.
	The job is never easy, but in the past she knew what she was up against when squaring off against CPS services in family court.
	Now she worries she's fighting something that she can't see.
	opaque algorithm whose statistical calculations help social workers decide which families should
	be investigated in the first place. A lot of people don't know that it's even being used.
	Families should have the right to have all of the information in their file.
	From LA to Colorado and throughout Oregon, as child welfare agencies use or consider tools
	similar to the one in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, an AP review has identified a
	number of concerns about the tech, including questions about its reliability and its
	potential to harden racial disparities in the child welfare system.
	Related issues have already torpedoed some jurisdictions' plan to use predictive models such as the tool notably dropped by the state of Illinois.
	According to research from Carnegie Mellon, a team obtained exclusively by the AP, Allegheny's Allegheny's algorithm in its first year of operation showed a pattern of flagging a disproportionate number of black children for a mandatory neglect investigation when compared with white kids.
	Well, I mean, human beings do probably exactly the same thing.
	And the algorithm, of course, assembles all this relevant data.
	It's always the same thing.
	Algorithms and AI, artificial intelligence, are always criticized for recognizing racial reality.
	Or recognizing patterns.
	Pattern recognitions just establish a recognized racial reality that can only be assumed as white supremacist, white privilege, when it Disproportionately affects blacks in the negative.
	So here's where we go.
	Child welfare officials in Allegheny County, the cradle of Mr. Rogers' TV neighborhood and the icon's child-centric innovations, says the cutting-edge tool, which has captured attention, uses data to support agency workers as they try to protect kids from neglect.
	Nuanced terms can include everything from inadequate housing to poor hygiene, but it is a different category from physical or sexual abuse, which is investigated separately in Pennsylvania and is not subject to the algorithm.
	Workers, whoever they are, shouldn't be asked to make, in a given year, 14, 15, 16,000 of these kind of decisions with incredibly imperfect information, said Eric Dalton.
	Oh, so he's defending the algorithm.
	Yeah.
	Critics say it gives a program powered by data mostly collected about poor people and outsized role in deciding families' fates.
	And I bet something else.
	I bet white people collect a lot of that data.
	Yeah, and they warned local officials growing reliance on AI tools.
	If the toolkit acted on its own to screen an incomparable rate of calls, it would have recommended that two-thirds of black children be investigated, compared with about half of all other children reported, according to the study published last month and co-authored by a researcher who has audited the county's algorithm.
	Well, you know, the only way that you can decide that the algorithms are wrong is to then go through by hand and look at all the data and conclude that there was some kind of Illegitimate disproportion.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But they don't ever bother with that.
	No, they don't.
	They don't, not at all.
	In fact, quote, it's not decreasing the impact among black families, said Logan Stapleton, a researcher at Carnegie Mellon U. On the point of accuracy and disparity, the county is making strong statements that I think are misleading.
	Because again, this reinforces existing racial disparities in the child welfare system, you know, akin to how algorithms have been used to make decisions in the criminal justice system.
	Well, ultimately, of course, if you believe that certain people should be removed from their households because they're abusive, then this is presumably a good thing, assuming that the criteria are correct.
	Correct.
	But whenever you find something that, as you point out, has a disparate impact on blacks, then it's got to go.
	And speaking of that, we've got one more that I... this is one that's just kind of silly.
	We're gonna go quick, but... Letter up, Mr. Curzon!
	This... somebody spent a lot of time to actually decide, hey, you know what?
	I wonder... and they had a hypothesis, and they tested the data, and here's what we get.
	College football ref...
	Sorry, it's actually kind of funny to read because it's so silly.
	College football referees penalize teams with black coaches more often than those with white coaches, a study suggests.
	Suggests.
	So here's the sub-headline.
	College football teams with black coaches average around five to seven more penalties per season than teams with white coaches, regardless of team or school quality.
	So again, you have this bombastic headline and you're like, wait a second, they average five to seven More penalties per season.
	That's not that many.
	Well, but you have to know, I mean, I am a football ignoramus.
	You are illiterate.
	You're going to have to explain to me what would be a normal number of penalties in a season.
	Well, let's get to that.
	If you only get 10 a season, then that might be a lot.
	Yeah, well, we're going to get to this.
	Okay.
	College football teams with black coaches are penalized more often than teams with coaches who are white.
	They are given five to seven extra penalties per season, as we stated.
	The finding raises new concerns about racism in sports refereeing.
	When, of course, college football, I think this past year they had one of the first all-black refereeing teams.
	So anyways, we'd love to see how they, if there's a black coach in that game, that they do more penalty flags on.
	That's just it.
	They never break out the coaches by race either.
	Are they going to find that black, who knows?
	So the Social Science Quarterly Study, released on Sunday, Held true even just in for the quality of players, coaches, and school studies, it comes amid rising concern about the dearth of black coaches at both professional and college level, a sport where 7 out of 10 players in its highest ranks in the NFL are black.
	Quote, teams with black head coaches are more frequently penalized, said lead author Andrew Davis of NC State University, based on the analysis of all Division I college football games from 2014 to 2019.
	So, college football teams typically receive 4 to 10 penalties per game.
	So the effect over a season is not huge.
	A 12 or 15 game season, all college football teams in Division 1 play 12 games now, a 12 or 15 game season might have 50 to 150 penalties for a team, which would roughly average to a 5% increase in penalties for teams with black coaches.
	Well, wait.
	One team could have 150 in a season and one could have just 50?
	That seems like a huge disparity.
	It's a very big disparity.
	Wow.
	Some teams just commit a whole lot more penalties.
	And those teams are predominantly those that have losing records.
	Because it's a team that has a lack of discipline, that are getting delayed game penalties, that are off sides, holding personal fouls.
	You just used a red flag word, Mr. Kersey.
	Discipline.
	Yeah.
	Discipline's a red flag word.
	It sure is.
	Well, we'll just leave it at that.
	I wouldn't want to venture into forbidden territory.
	Yeah, so they then talk about what penalties do.
	They said that it's important to note that the study found an association between the two could not conclusively prove The additional penalties were directly due to the coach's race or ethnicity.
	That, of course, is buried toward the bottom of the piece.
	So you're you sit there and you think you read that piece the way to say you have to if you have any discernment, if you have any logic, if you're rational, you go back and say, well, wait a second, then how does this finding raise new concerns about racism in sports refereeing?
	What's the point of this article?
	This was in the BuzzFeed.
	You're looking at yourself.
	What does this actually mean?
	And again, it found that Black coaches typically were given 5.5 more penalties in a 12-game season and nearly 7 more penalties in a 15-game season.
	They cannot statistically show that penalty yards affect, however, for the longer time period.
	So again, you can have a penalty, but there might not be the same amount of yards.
	If it's a hold, it's going to be a hold from where the play occurred back 10 yards.
	If it's a personal foul, that's a 15-yard penalty.
	If it's a delay of game, that's only 5 yards.
	You know, Pastor of Fear, it's at 15 yards.
	I know you're like, well, wait a second.
	I'm already thoroughly bored.
	This story is so silly.
	But again, it's the type of story in a society where the supply of racism definitely doesn't equal the demand.
	You have something as asinine as this article and this study, which again, it basically says, Hey, you know, we actually can't conclusively prove the additional penalties were directly due to the coach's race or ethnicity, or to the refs.
	But racism is never conclusively proven.
	It is only asserted and assumed.
	So, they're right within the mainstream.
	Well, Mr. Kersey, this year is the 30th anniversary of 1992 L.A.
	riots.
	Hmm, rooftop Koreans.
	Hard to believe it's been 30 years.
	Now, this is an article reporting on the racial mood in Los Angeles.
	May I ask a quick question?
	You may.
	30 years ago, the L.A.
	riots happened.
	Your book, Paved with Good Intentions, I believe was released the same year, or 91?
	It was in 91, I believe.
	Could you foresee the United States, knowing what you knew in 1992, looking like it does in 2022?
	Others have asked this question.
	I may answer it in some detail at some later date.
	That is something about which I've thought a lot.
	Really?
	And frequently, yes.
	Interesting.
	If I had known what the United States was going to be looking like in 30 years into the future, Would I have founded American Renaissance and operated in the way I did?
	And I will leave listeners pondering that question or pondering what that answer might be.
	Wow.
	And I will leave you pondering it too.
	For the time being, we will talk about the L.A.
	riots.
	Now, this is from a local news source in L.A.
	30 years after the riots.
	Los Angeles residents fears that racial unrest could again boil over into violence have surged to their worst level, their highest level, in the past three decades.
	In the past three decades, they are more worried that something like this could happen again than any time in the past 30 years.
	Roughly 68% of respondents said they found it very or somewhat likely that riots like those that occurred in 1992 will occur in the next five years.
	68%.
	That's more than two-thirds.
	That is the highest percentage in the history of the survey, which has been conducted regularly every year since 1997.
	That was five years after the riots, they first got this thing going.
	And they've done it every year.
	I think that's quite interesting.
	And as it turned out, when the first year they did it, 1997, five years afterwards, so people were still remembering it, 64% of residents thought more violence of that kind was likely.
	That percentage steadily declined from 1997 on until 2017.
	It steadily declined from 1997 to 2016.
	on until 2017. It steadily declined from 1997 to 2016. But then in 2017 it crept up to 58%.
	Researchers hoped that the increase in 2017 was an anomaly.
	Bye.
	But it wasn't, said a spokesman.
	Not even close.
	Now a full 68% of residents in Los Angeles think something like the 1992 riots could happen again.
	Furthermore, nearly 39% of respondents said they believe race relations in Los Angeles are worse 19% say they've improved and 42% say they've stayed the same.
	So the preponderance of sentiment is they've gotten worse.
	So the spokesman for Loyola Marymount University which conducted the survey says, after years of surveys showing positive trends in 2022, we see a clear and dramatic drop in how race relations are perceived in Los Angeles.
	So, it's not a post-racial America after all, despite hope and change and Barack Obama.
	Now, at the same time, There was a letter to the editor of the Los Angeles Times reacting to commentary about the 1992 riots.
	Because you know what the problem is.
	You know why everybody thinks race relations are worse.
	You know.
	I know.
	Our listeners know.
	And so does Chae Young Park, a Korean.
	The title of his letter is, White Racism Played a Big Role in Black Korean Tension During the 1992 Riots.
	It's white superpowers again!
	Oh my goodness.
	We weren't even there!
	It was white people, it was white privilege that magically lifted all the Koreans with their rifles onto the roofs to protect their private property, their businesses, and their commercial interests from black mobs.
	White racism made blacks and Koreans get along worse.
	And let me quote from this.
	Mr. Kyung Park writes, we can talk also about white racism in media, financial institutions, educational settings, government, and the criminal justice system, which all contributed to developing black Korean tension.
	How does he know?
	But they did.
	At the same time, what I call subaltern racism, such as anti-black and anti-Asian racism, contributed to the tension.
	Subaltern racism, such as anti-black and anti-Asian racism.
	Well, Kyu-Yong Park knows something I don't.
	But as usual, it's our fault, Mr. Carson.
	Yours and mine.
	Personally, both now and forever.
	And every unborn white child is somehow to cause this divisiveness.
	Yep.
	Even from the womb, even from the womb, they're causing it all.
	It's fascinating.
	It's not just that.
	We know that in New York, they tried to claim that all this anti-Asian violence, when we have the video of all the perps, and they're all black.
	They're attacking these elderly Asian women.
	They are all agents of white supremacy.
	And then what was the city?
	Was it San Francisco or Oakland where there was a ring of black gang members who targeted Asians because they knew that they carried so much petty cash?
	That was San Jose.
	San Jose, that's right.
	Yes, but that doesn't somehow make the news.
	Meanwhile, Black Lives Matter are in the crosshairs.
	Let's see, Indiana Attorney General.
	You could consider this something of a good news story, I suppose.
	Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita filed a lawsuit against Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation on Thursday.
	That was just a week ago.
	The suit is over BLM's handling of the millions of dollars it has collected in donations.
	The lawsuit requires that BLM respond to investigative demands filed in February of this year.
	Well, they just sat on the demand.
	And so, the Indiana District Attorney wants to know, please answer.
	It has to do, in part, with the fact that BLM secretly bought a $6 million Los Angeles mansion and never disclosed it.
	When a magazine inquired about the house, BLM reportedly circulated a memo discussing the possibility of trying to, quote, kill the story.
	But this is, of course, merely abstract usage of the word.
	The purchase was separate from a 2021 transaction in which BLM transferred money to a Canadian non-profit run by the wife of BLM co-founder Patrice Cullors.
	Yes, she has a wife, to buy a $3 million house.
	Now, I think, to me, Patrice Cullors' reaction to all this is the best part of the story.
	She slammed American charity transparency laws after the purchase of this $6 million mansion was exposed.
	She said she found it triggering, emotionally compromising when she hears about financial documents being made public.
	It's such a trip now to hear the term 990, she said.
	It's like ugh.
	It's like triggering.
	I didn't actually know what a 990 was before all this happened.
	Well, what is a 990, Mr. Kersey?
	I will explain to you.
	A 990 form is a detailed form that you file with the IRS when you have non-profit status.
	And the way 990s work, the way non-profits justify their tax-exempt status is by explaining what happens every dollar that comes in, every dollar that goes up.
	You have to account for it.
	And if you buy a $6 million mansion and you don't put it on your list of assets, You have grossly made a violation, and ever since 1994, New Century Foundation, our parent organization, has very carefully and scrupulously filed our 990s.
	Well, she is triggered by abiding by the law.
	Patrice Cullors claimed that activists' lives are put at risk and that they endure trauma by having to disclose their charity's finances.
	She claims the system is being literally weaponized against us.
	Well, following the law is triggering for certain people.
	But I guess we knew that.
	And of course, during the riots, they got used to ignoring lots of laws.
	Correct.
	She goes on to say, this doesn't seem safe for us, this non-profit structure.
	Well, you know, they can disband and become profit-making if they wish.
	This is like deeply unsafe.
	If the organization and the people in it are being attacked and scrutinized at everything they do, this leads to deep burnout.
	Deep like resistance and trauma.
	Well, well.
	The fact that they have to file 990s.
	Play by the rules.
	Play by the rules.
	Boy, are they babies.
	They're being attacked by the media.
	I bet they've never been deplatformed or anything the way we have been.
	They haven't been accused of the kinds of things we've been accused of.
	And boy, is she whining.
	Then she blasted the media's scrutiny of BLM.
	We have to stop it.
	We have to shut it down.
	We have to be showing up against it.
	Well, good luck!
	I mean, that's what the free speech and the free press is supposed to be all about, Patrice, baby!
	They get to write about what they want to write about.
	Now, we, of course, we may write about it, but we can't publish it.
	Oh, what babies.
	Just what pitiful babies these people are.
	In any case, as usual, something else that's too white in America, and this time, it's corporate boardroom.
	Well, they've been trying for decades, and a lot of the Fortune 500 companies have tried to diversify as much as they can, but it's not working fast enough.
	As diversity rises, U.S.
	corporate boards still disproportionately Following a pressure campaign from outsiders, more companies are disclosing the racial breakdown to their boards of directors.
	Amid the push to get U.S.
	boardrooms to look more like companies' customers and employees, advocates are finally seeing just how steep the task will be.
	Board of Directors of publicly traded U.S.
	companies are much more white and much less diverse than the overall population, often starkly so.
	Just 2.7% of directors at the start of the year were Hispanic.
	That would need to soar to 18.5% to mirror the U.S.
	population.
	And it's got to mirror the U.S.
	population.
	Where's the NFL?
	The players don't have to.
	Nope, nope.
	70%?
	It's fine.
	That's great.
	That's diverse.
	Outside of looking at a photograph of each director, it hasn't always been easy to measure racial diversity in corporate boards.
	On Thursday, executive data firm Ecular released its first racial breakdown of boards for companies in the Russell 3000 Index.
	Which covers about 97% of investable U.S.
	stocks.
	The survey found only 6.2% of directors are black versus 13.4% of the country.
	Shameful.
	And the 5% of directors who are Asian or Pacific Islander descent also fall short of the 6.1% for the entire U.S.
	population.
	Hmm.
	But they're doing pretty well.
	I wonder why, Mr. Kershaw.
	I can't imagine.
	Yes, but proceed.
	Ecular polled the numbers from a range of sources, including disclosures from companies,
	data from affiliate networks, and lists of influential executives from racial and ethnic
	minorities. Its results are similar to the disproportionate representation found in other
	surveys of more limited groups. Executive search form Hydric and Struggles earlier this week
	released its roundup of boards at smaller group companies, those in the Fortune 500.
	It found Black directors hold 26% of board seats while Asian or African American directors had 9% and Hispanic directors held 6%.
	Oh, boy.
	So that is 1541.
	So 59% of board of directors are white.
	I'll tell you, I have to fess up.
	I have to lay bare the truth.
	We have a board of directors at New Century Foundation.
	And guess how many are white?
	100%.
	Oh my gosh.
	Oh, it's shameful.
	But you see, we're not publicly traded.
	No, you're not.
	But NASDAQ, for example, last year said U.S.
	securities regulators approved a rule last summer requiring companies listed on its U.S.
	exchange to file an annual document detailing racial and ethnic backgrounds of its directors, among other demographic data.
	It has a fileable PDF form available to make it easier for companies which have to submit the data by August 8th.
	Or whenever they file their 2020 proxy statements, whichever comes later.
	Well, I believe on one of our podcasts, we discussed the fact that the state of California, which had, they had, were going to require a certain number of homosexuals, women, non-whites to be on boards of companies domiciled in California.
	And the judge said, no.
	Equal protection clause.
	However, NASDAQ by August 7th, 2023, will require a listed company to either have at least one director considered diverse or explain why it doesn't.
	Is your board still all white, Mr. Taylor?
	How dare you?
	The New Century Foundation's not going to be on NASDAQ anytime soon, but that would be a heck of a question to have to answer.
	Nope.
	Nope.
	Because we like it that way.
	No trouble at all, Ed, for that question.
	Now, I have some interesting news from the British Virgin Islands.
	We don't often talk about the BVI on our podcast, but it's an overseas territory made up of more than 40 islands located in the Caribbean, east of Puerto Rico.
	It operates as a parliamentary democracy, with the Premier acting as the head of the elected government, along with a governor appointed by His Majesty's government.
	And the governor is John Rankin.
	Well, as it turns out, the prime minister, Andrew Fahey, was arrested in Miami just this last Thursday, along with senior port official Olean Vine Maynard, whose son was also arrested.
	Now, these are all African Virgin Islanders.
	They will remain in custody until the bond hearing.
	And according to U.S.
	documents, Mr. Fahey, the Prime Minister, had agreed to a $700,000 payment to allow drug traffickers to use the ports of the British Virgin Islands in order to get their swag into the United States.
	Oh, dear.
	Oh, dear.
	Well, just coincidentally, and the timing of this is really quite delicious, a report written by a British judge named Sir Gary Hickenbottom was just released which described the state of the governance in the British Virgin Islands as appallingly bad.
	This is before the arrests.
	Oh, these Brits are wonderful, aren't they?
	Totally bad.
	Are they talking about New Orleans?
	No, British Virgin Islands.
	Might as well be.
	But pretty much the same demographics, I'd say.
	This inquiry was commissioned back in 2021, a year ago, amid claims about corruption and misuse of taxpayers' money.
	And so it's not directly connected with the coincidental arrest of the Prime Minister.
	I mean, boy, isn't this a case if I told you so.
	I bet British Judge Sir Gary Hickenbottom is slapping himself on the back for having used this expression appallingly bad.
	Well, the judge goes on to say, and this is strong medicine, he concludes the BVI constitution should be suspended and its government dissolved.
	And apparently the British Crown has the authority to do this.
	Now, in effect, the territory would be returned to direct rule from London.
	Now, it is a population of only 25,000, but as I say, now this is probably a little blacker than the city of New Orleans.
	It's 76% black.
	New Orleans is what, about 60, 65?
	It's actually, I don't know if you've had that diaspora that was spread out by Hurricane Katrina starting to come back.
	Oh, they're coming back.
	Well, it's 67% black.
	5.5% Hispanic, interestingly enough, and 5.4% white.
	So it looks as though it could be very well taken back under the wing of Her Majesty's government.
	Now, this is a story from National Public Radio that only has one really, I think, worthwhile tagline, but I'll get to it.
	It's dated April 28th and it's about how the Republicans are threatening the Democratic majority and what the Dems are going to do about that.
	Because more than 30 House Democrats are heading for the exits and progressives have seen several major legislative proposals stall out.
	So NPR is very worried.
	It goes on to say, two progressive lawmakers in the House, Democratic representatives, Jamie Raskin and Ro Khanna, say they're developing a plan to turn around the cascade of bad news.
	Now, Jamie Raskin, I always thought Jamie was short for James, but it's not.
	His actual name is Jamin, J-A-M-I-N.
	And Ro Khanna is an Indian-American.
	So, they're developing a plan to turn around the cascade of bad news.
	Ah, they tell NPR they're on the ground floor of talks to fuel new victories.
	Now, Khanna warns that if the GOP does indeed take over the House, President Biden will be impeached.
	I'm not sure that's true.
	He also said Trump has been able to capture patriotic rhetoric, but he and Raskin argue that Democrats need to take these talking points back from the Republicans.
	They're patriotic.
	And this is also tied to issues of race, Kana said.
	Kana argues that Democrats need to talk about race more candidly.
	He says, I think we have to say very clearly, look, some of our greatest leaders were white.
	This is an Indian American cartoon.
	True, true, true.
	I hope he says that wherever he goes.
	Yeah.
	I hope he says that to all the white people.
	Gee, now come on, some of our greatest leaders were white.
	And their statues, and their statues say up, streets named after them deserve to be honored in schools.
	But some of our, some of our greatest leaders were white.
	Some, I mean, maybe what, 10%?
	Come on, Mr. Khanna, explain.
	Some of our greatest leaders, well, what do you know?
	What do you know?
	Thanks, Mr. Conner, for making that clear.
	But moving on to Lafayette, Louisiana.
	What we thought might have been a mass shooting turns out not to have been.
	You know, there was another mass shooting.
	I just have to quickly mention there's an attempt to try and bring some semblance of civility back to Jackson, Mississippi.
	That's the capital of Mississippi.
	That's a big job.
	Oh, it's a colossal job.
	It is probably America's most dangerous city per capita.
	Probably, when you actually look at the population drop, how many homicides there are, non-fatal shootings.
	Well, they brought this mud bug event, the Mud Bug Festival.
	You're familiar with crawfish?
	Yes.
	They're called mud bugs in the South, so people call them mud bugs.
	Crawfish, crayfish, crawdaddies.
	I call them crawfish, but some people call them mud bugs.
	Well, they had this mud bug festival, and then there was a mass shooting on Saturday, so it was canceled for Sunday, unfortunately.
	That's probably the end of the mud bug festival in Jackson, so there was one mass shooting.
	I would stay away from mud buggery.
	Whatever possible.
	I'll tell you, a crawfish festival is actually a lot of fun.
	A boiling pot of crawfish with sausage and potatoes, that's delicious.
	However, this story might even be more tasty.
	After 12 shots, police explain why Lafayette Is it Lafayette or Lafayette?
	I think it's called Lafayette, just like the marquee.
	Lafayette Weekend's shooting was not mass shooting.
	So let me just headline one more time.
	After 12 shot, police explain why Lafayette's weekend shooting was not mass shooting.
	Well, inquiring minds sure want to know.
	12 shot, but it's not a mass shooting.
	One of them that was shot was the actual shooter.
	So he shot 11 people.
	Police shot him.
	He did not die.
	Doesn't say how many casings they found, by the way, how many shots were fired.
	That information is not in this story.
	Lafayette police say the shooting downtown Sunday morning does not fit the mass shooting category, and Sergeant Robin Green said that's because it does not appear that the event was pre-planned.
	UL Lafayette Criminal Justice Master Instructor Paula Broussard says a mass shooting is typically the killing of four or more people in a specific time frame without A cooling off period.
	She explains there's usually some type of social economic or political goal involved
	Quote typically a mass shooting is something that is planned out and they have a purpose
	They're trying to get a message across whether that message is they've been harmed or they want revenge against the
	people. What she said According to Bruce Hart's instructor bio her research
	experience includes terrorism serial crimes ethics and handgun issues
	Quote rival gangs will often kill more than two people at a time, but there is no purpose
	There's no goal or message involved Does that mean it's not a mass shooting?
	Yeah.
	What?
	I'm confused.
	She said a mass shooting is a title that's actually been created outside of law enforcement.
	She said this, quote, it was a title that was created by the press and picked up by the media.
	It's used in television and in movies, but from the police standpoint, very seldom will they call a shooting a mass shooting, unless it's a situation like in Las Vegas where somebody just started shooting up a concert or a theater.
	I did not look up a picture of Paula Broussard So anyways, but here we go.
	On Monday, the Lafayette Police Department released a statement regarding Sunday morning's shooting.
	Quote, the police department wants the community to know that this was not a mass shooting.
	We have no evidence to indicate this or that this was a pre-planned event.
	The identified suspect is a black male, Carl Thompson, 40-year-old of New Iberia.
	He's listed in critical condition.
	This is one of the more confusing stories, but the fact is they came out and said, Hey, we know that the New York Times calls an incident where four or more people are shot.
	That's a mass shooting.
	Doesn't matter if they're dead, they're a casualty.
	The New York Times, that same article that was published in 2016, let slip that 75% of these incidents
	have a black shooter.
	And in this case, we know that the mud bug festival shooting that led to the cancellation of the
	Jackson Crawfish Festival was black.
	He had felony charges.
	And in this case, the shooter, which the Lafayette Police Department says, hey, it's not a mass shooting.
	It's just a guy with low impulse control and maybe low IQ.
	And a total of 12 people hit, including him.
	He shot 11 and the police shot him.
	He shot 11 and the police shot him.
	But it's not a mass shooting.
	No.
	Because it didn't happen during Catholic Mass.
	Can't believe I'm on white people, so...
	Oh boy.
	All right.
	And again, Lafayette is a city that has since that date that you mentioned earlier, May 25th, 2020, when the country changed, when the country went in a totally opposite direction.
	Lafayette, if you just type in Lafayette black gun crime, you'll see a plethora of stories about how bad the violence has gotten there, courtesy of black individuals and black pastors saying, we got to do something about all this violence.
	We've got more stories.
	We're running out of time and we're running out of menthol cigarettes because the Biden administration might ban them.
	Smoke them while you can.
	That's terrible.
	But that has split the black community with banned supporters arguing that it promotes a healthier lifestyle and critics arguing it unfairly targets blacks who use them.
	Now, black smokers overwhelmingly prefer menthol cigarettes.
	I should have looked up the statistics on this, but that has been known for a long time.
	Kool's and what's the other one?
	Ah, gosh.
	In any case, Kool's is one of the big ones.
	The FDA rule could come as early as this week.
	After President Biden's FDA had a year to issue proposed product standards.
	Now, Portia White of the NAACP in their policy and legislative affairs office says, we feel the tobacco industry has targeted the black community for more than 50 years and so she wants this ban put in.
	Well, the fact is, Portia darling, the industry has targeted everybody.
	Yes.
	They want everybody to buy cigarettes.
	Now, interestingly enough, Al Sharpton and Ben Crump say, hold on, not so fast on this ban.
	We'd like to see a commission to study how they deal with the unintended consequences before they impose a ban, say they.
	Now, there are dark rumors that these two are getting tobacco company money.
	I don't know if those rumors are true, and that's why they are opposed to the ban on menthol-flavored cigarettes.
	And they have powerful allies, Crump and Al Sharpton, Eric Garner's mama, as well as Trayvon Martin's mama and George Floyd's brother.
	They wrote a letter to the White House last week urging the administration to make an effort to comprehend the criminal justice implications of such a ban on the black community.
	Did you know that Trayvon Martin's mom and George Floyd's brother and Eric Garner's mom are forceful forces for change, I guess?
	Now, and Sharpton speaks for them when he says, how could anybody ignore interactions between police and the black community if they're increased because of the ban?
	If a policeman sees a guy standing on a corner smoking a cool, he's asking, where did you get that from?
	And that will lead to an interaction.
	The fact is, Mr. Kersey, this is a ban on manufacturing.
	These things are going to disappear.
	Yeah.
	Where's this guy in the corner smoking a Kool going to get a hold of his Kool?
	Are those manufactured by Altria?
	The company that used to be Philip Morris?
	I don't know who makes Kools.
	Who knows who makes them?
	Have you ever smoked one?
	A menthol cigarette?
	Yeah.
	I took a puff on one once.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	They're a funny feeling thing.
	Did you have a Colt .45 near?
	Colt .45 and menthol, yeah, and a little crack cocaine.
	That's how I spent my youth, Mr. Kersey, before you were born.
	But then, and this is a poor Alex Sharpton, he says he's got another problem.
	He says, this puts us in a very awkward position as ministers.
	Grandma can't smoke her kools, but Jamal can smoke his weed.
	I bet he worries a lot about his role as a minister.
	But, again, the crazy thing is, they're all worried.
	They're all worried about possible interactions with the police because of the ban.
	But, again, the ban is not on consumption.
	The ban is on manufacturing.
	So this seems to be a completely imaginary, cooked-up problem.
	Then, they go even further.
	Some have questioned the federal ban's political impact, especially in a midterm election year.
	The ban could impact black voters Many of whom have been supporters of Biden.
	So, the question obviously is, you can't put the ban on now because black people might be upset.
	And might not show up to vote.
	Might not show up to vote without their cool.
	He could be impeached because he restricted blacks.
	Black people's ability to get cool.
	That's right.
	Boy, that's a high crime and misdemeanor.
	So let's see, gosh, we're running, oh, what story will we finish with next?
	We have so little time.
	Well, here, this is a good news story.
	Judge Chad Kennedy in Greenberg v. Goodrich holds unconstitutional the revised Pennsylvania Rule of Professional Conduct.
	The proposal was, it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to, in the practice of law, knowingly engage in conduct constituting harassment or discrimination based on sex, race, gender, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	The judge wrote, When laws against harassment attempt to regulate oral or written expression on such topics, however detestable the views expressed may be, we cannot turn a blind eye to the First Amendment implications.
	So look at that!
	A judge actually said that one of these kooky speech codes is unconstitutional.
	These things occasionally happen.
	So, as we come down the homestretch here, I think we should once again invite our leaders, our listeners, excuse me, to get in touch.
	They are our leaders because they help lead the conversation.
	If you get in touch with us, you will lead our conversation.
	They do lead the conversation.
	Yes, dear listeners, dear listeners, you can write to me directly at amran.com and just click on the contact us tab and you will contact me.
	And the other alternative is to write an email message to Because we live here at ProtonMail.com.
	Once again, all one word.
	Because we live here at ProtonMail.com.
	And Mr. Taylor's too kind to do this, but I am not.
	We love having you as listeners.
	But remember, we were talking about that 990.
	Remember, the New Century Foundation is a non-profit organization.
	We encourage you to give a tax-deductible donation.
	Send it in the name of the podcast.
	And you can do that by sending a check, money order, or even cash to Box 527, Oakton, Virginia, 22124.
	Box 527, Oakton, Virginia, 22124.

▲