Category Archives: Egalitarianism

Acceptance Into Medical School Depends Greatly On Race, Not Necessarily Aptitude

Affirmative Action, Education, Egalitarianism, Gender, Intelligence, Race

How did he get into very good medical schools with subpar scores (3.1 GPA)? Vijay Chokal-Ingam, who’s of Indian heritage, studied his chances of admission while Indian—and then resolved to pretend to be … African-American. Voila!

Admission into medical school is determined by the applicants GPA (Grade Point Average) and MCAT (the Medical College’s Admission Test), explains Tucker Carlson. The standard, however, differs by the appearance of the candidates.

(Here is a new “MCAT conversion table.”)

Asians with an MCAT of 27 to 29 and a GPA of 3.4 to 3.49 have only a 21% chance of getting into a medical school. A white with that score has a 29% of acceptance.

African-American applicants have an 81% chance of acceptance with these scores.

IF YOU’RE HISPANIC, you have a 60% probability of being accepted with such scores. (Tucker did not explain that respectable scores of 27 to 29 place the candidate in the 61st to 73rd percentile.)

An African-American candidate was 4 times more likely to be admitted to medical school than an Asian with the same MCAT scores.

If only Tucker had surveyed the degree to which women of all races trump men in the medical school selection.

(I also believe aptitude tests have been modified over the decades to address what the egalitarians insist is “racially biased Questions in standardized tests.” But I don’t have the literature to show this dumbing down over the decades.)

RELATED: “MCAT and GPA Grid for Applicants and Acceptees by Selected Race and Ethnicity, 2013-2014 through 2015-2016 (Aggregated).”

NEW COLUMN: Progressive Crazies Are Getting The Kids Killed

Crime, Education, Egalitarianism, Family, Feminism, Gender, Sex

NEW COLUMN IS “Progressive Crazies Are Getting The Kids Killed.” It’s currently on WND.com, the Unz Review and Townhall.com (abridged).

An excerpt:

Muslim men murder two European women backpacking across a Morocco mountain range and, right away pundits holler, “ISIS, Jihad, extremism, terrorism.”

Likewise misleading are the leads from the intelligence authorities, who seem to confirm that, but for “ISIS, Jihad, extremism, terrorism”—it would be perfectly safe to adopt the improvident habit embraced by the deceased and many young ladies like them:

Wander happily all over the world in the belief that the world is their oyster.

To be sure, Jihad was likely part of the predatory behavior involved in the decapitation of the two young Scandinavian lovelies, in Morocco.

But while potent, Jihad—and the Brownie points accrued for offing infidels—is not the main incentive in operation here.

Freud’s Pleasure Principle is—that atavistic, sexual pleasure derived by predatory males, when stalking and subduing a woman.

You adopt the argument of feminism when you willfully ignore sex, gender, and the man-woman disparities in crimes involving these young, attractive women.

Like many an agenda-driven pundit, the authorities are only too pleased to compartmentalize and abstract causality. They’ll tell you that Islamists, not Muslim men practicing Islam, are implicated in violence against women. They’ll tell you that a lofty ideology, not ordinary sex, was the motive for murdering Maren Ueland, aged 28, and Louisa Jespersen, aged 24. On and on.

It’s up to formative figures like parents to counter the crazies—for those who ignore the power differential that comes with biological differences are crazy. What’s worse, these crazies are getting the kids killed.

So, yes, Jihad. But Jihad is secondary to the probable sexual subjugation to which these mindless young women would have been subjected, as they traipsed around the Muslim Maghreb defenseless.

Please, parents and pedagogues, start teaching young girls that “Beauty and the Beast” is a fantasy; that the world, certainly the Third World, is not their oyster; that women can get raped, even killed, if they Kumbaya alone around the world. Or, around the country, for that matter.

The lesson is universal.

Before being abducted, raped and killed by stalker Jesse Matthew, in September of 2014, Hannah Graham drew the attention of this predator by wondering about alone, late at night, in Charlottesville, Virginia, her midriff so bare as to render her crotch almost visible. In surveillance footage, Ms. Graham can be seen swaying as though tipsy.

Invariably, the grief-struck parents of many a young woman like poor Hannah will demur, “She died the way she lived; free.” No: Ms. Graham and too many girls like her—if one is to go by crime documentaries such as “Investigation Discovery”—die horrible, futile deaths. This is likely because these young women are raised in a society that refuses to recognize the limits imposed by biology, preferring to teach them that their beauty, desirability and fragility place no impediments on their liberty to live la vida loca. …

… READ THE REST.  THE NEW COLUMN, “Progressive Crazies Are Getting The Kids Killed,” is on WND.com, the Unz Review and Townhall.com (abridged).

UPDATE (1/4/019): Facebook:

Craig Smith: Liberalism is a mental disorder. If the parents are oblivious to the idiocy of open borders, illegal immigration, and allowing hordes of “refugees” in, as many are, then they’re oblivious to the dangers their daughters will be in by traveling in shithole countries, and shithole localities in this country. They have nothing to pass on to their daughters.
Ilana Mercer: How many times must I beg readers not to cast wickedness, evil and bottomless stupidity as mental diseases. To do so is bad thinking. And wrong on logic, science, etc. It also absolves individuals of responsibility for their evil ways.

UPDATED (10/10/018): Kavanaugh ‘Gang Rape-Rooms’ Fantasist Julie Swetnick: A Vetted, Decorated US Government Worker

Affirmative Action, Comedy & Humor, Donald Trump, Egalitarianism, Feminism, Gender, Government, Labor

The most preposterous of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s accusers was Julie Swetnick, who is or was a career federal-government employee and a “decorated” one at that.

What does this tell Americans about the quality of the civil servants in their government?

You might counter that the Swetnick case is an isolated incident, but the following is axiomatic; we all know this to be true:

The American government is riddled with set-asides, preferential hiring practices and affirmative action, which compromise an already compromised institution (The State).

NYP:

Swetnick  holds “active clearances” for her work with the US Department of Treasury, US Mint and Internal Revenue Service.

She said she also previously had security clearances with the US Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection.

An active security clearance means Swetnick has been subjected to a stringent background investigation that deemed her qualified to have access to “classified national security information … so long as the person has a need to know the information,” according to the State Department website.

More shameful is that The Economist (a real news organization) was uncritical about Swetnick’s credentials. If they were minted by the US government, well then, her credentials must be stand for something:

… the latest of [the judge’s accusers] has multiple security clearances and signed an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, that she was gang raped at a party that Mr Kavanaugh attended.

See “Truth and consequences: American politics after a year of #MeToo.”

UPDATE (10/10/018):

Scary to be a boy:

FBI Report:

Senator Collins shone:

 

So did the “Sergeant-at-Arms:

Diane Feinstein:

You can’t fix ugly:

Or diabolical: NOT SURE WHY THE WRITER WON’T state the obvious: “THIS IS WHAT WOMEN OF THE LEFT SOUND LIKE.” Still, good enough for an incomplete deduction

Ana Navarro:

Appeasement already?

Why Liberals Hate The Original Constitutional Scheme

Constitution, Egalitarianism, Europe, Federalism, Founding Fathers

Liberals disapprove of the brilliant men “who wrote America’s constitution,” you know, the geniuses of the pale patriarchy.

Yes, concedes the Economist, the Senate was devised “to represent places, not people, and there is a case for that; other constitutions, such as Germany’s, look to ensure regional representation in their upper house.”

So far, so good.

But liberals want heavily populated cities and city slickers—they vote Democrat—to drown out rural people, who vote Republicans. So, for ensuring that “the largest states do not dominate the rest,” the Senate is considered bad by liberals. “[T]he constitution provides equal representation for all the states, large and small alike. This builds in an over-representation for people in small or sparsely populated places.”

That liberals can’t abide.

But for the electoral college liberals, who’re ignorant of any political theory other than egalitarianism, reserve the ugliest terms.

The “electoral college,” writes the Economist, is as system “that America’s founders jury-rigged in part to square the needs of democracy with the demography of slavery.”

Come again?

See: “The minority majority: America’s electoral system gives the Republicans advantages over Democrats,” July 12th 2018.