Did you know there are more white students than black students at highly competitive Stuyvesant High School in New York? Admission is color-blind and depends on taking a test. But New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman isn’t fooled; she explains that it is nevertheless a case of white supremacy.
White students generally have more means with which to prep for this test, some doing it for years. Yes it’s a test, no it is not an equal playing field. https://t.co/2s0TwkKwHV
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) March 19, 2019
But, as Steve Sailer points out, Ms. Haberman is missing most of the picture:
The New York Times’ main White House correspondent explains that the poor representation of blacks (1%) at Stuyvesant HS in NYC is due to whites (18%) having White Privilege. Granted, Asians make up 74% of the Stuyvesant student body, but NYT reporters don’t possess concepts like Asian Supremacy, so who can remember random numbers like that?
Why is there no such concept as Asian Supremacy, given that Asian-American incomes substantially outpace white incomes? There is no possible explanation for such a disparity other than discrimination or privilege, right? Last time I checked the Census Bureau’s numbers, whites were, as an ethnic group, somewhere around number 20 in median household income. Iranian-Americans earn, on the average, considerably more. And the income “gap” between Jews and Gentiles is wider than the gap between whites and blacks. More privilege at work, no doubt.
It must be tough to be an aging left-wing reporter whose world-view has fallen hopelessly behind the times.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.