Cancel Culture vs Dave Chappelle

 Dave Chappelle has been in the news lately.  His Netflix special "The Closer" has  gotten a lot of attention from the gay, and transgender communities.  There have been talks of cancelling Chappelle, and there was walkout of Netflix employees, but they aren't going to be effective at canceling Dave Chappelle.  

Chapelle has a couple serious protections against being canceled.  For one he's black.  He's also a black comedian that can be seen as pro black.  A lot of his jokes have been about white people, or about what he feels are issues of racism against black people.  The majority of the black community is more than willing to stand with Chapelle, and in order to effectively "cancel" him you got to get the black community to turn against him.  Even if Netflix let go of him, which they haven't indicated they are going to do, he can still make a pretty good living off of his popularity in the black community.  Not to mention his popularity with people of other races.  He walked away from a 50 million dollar deal with Comedy Central, and was able to comeback, and build up momentum before  he even got his Netflix deal.  Having the deal certainly helps but he can do quite well without it.  If anything people might feel that it backs the opinion that LGBT people are more protected than black people. 

Also because Chappelle is a relatively left leaning popular black comedian some of those same buzzwords that seem to be so effective when used against white people, especially heterosexual white males, aren't going to be nearly as effective.  I read a comment from some idiot on twitter who reacted to Jon Stewart defending Chappelle, by saying that they expect that from a cisgendered white male.  They also has numerous positive responses.   Imagine a black comedian defending Chapelle, and someone who isn't black saying that they expect that from a cisgendered black male.   You can't just use a bunch of buzzwords to get the black community to turn against Dave Chappelle, or to get those supporting Chappelle to shut up. It just isn't going to work.  Dababy hasn't even been cancelled.  Not with the black community anyway, and he said things that were much more homophobic than what Dave Chappelle got in trouble for.  

I had already watched all of his last two specials on Netflix, and took the time to watch is 2017 special to see what else he may said that offended people.  Some of this jokes about trans people would be enough to disgust most homophobes such as saying that Cat. Jenner should spread the lips for a nude pic for Sports Illustrated.   Stick, and Stones was the comedy special in which it got really big, but I don't remember any mean spirited transphobic jokes.  The Closer takes on a more serious tone, and that's part of the reason I don't like it as much as Sticks, and Stones.  He did make a false equivialance in bring up homicide involving DaBaby because that was self defense, and the media has certainly shown that they care greatly about the deaths of black men, when they are killed by people who aren't black.    He did say he was TERF, but he also said that he was a feminist, which he obviously isn't.  He was just poking fun at the dictionary definition of a feminist.  He said gender is real, which it is btw.  Why can't someone recognize the reality of gender, and still agree with someone's right to change up their body to look like a member of the opposite sex.  One of the big problems with social justice is that it doesn't leave much room for middle ground.  If you are on their side then you need to go all the way.  Overall it stoked the fires even more than the previous specials, and it was supposed to.  This was his chance to address to controversy, and I didn't expect him to back down.

 Black people in general don't really like the gay movement.  Yes there are some of us who support, but for the most part that is not the case.  No other race is more against it than black people.  Among no other race is being gay, or trans as controversial as it is in the black race.  To get Chappelle cancelled you've got to convince black people that what he said, which wasn't even homophobic, is that bad to turn against him.  That isn't going to happen.

Should We Pretend Flo Jo Wasn't On Steroids? Why?

 Claire Lehmann caused a stir on black twitter by saying that Shacarri Richardson, and Florence Griffith Joyner used steroids.  She used strong hair, and nails as evidence, and a little more than that with Richardson's, association with former steroid user Dennis Mitchell.  The nail, and hair argument are really strange.  Richardsons nails are probably fake, and her hair definently is.  

When it comes to Richardson there isn't great evidence of her steroid use.  She could be on steroids.  She an elite runner, and her 10.72 is one of the fastest 100 meters ever for a woman.  Still what she has done could be done naturally.  When it comes to Flo Jo, though, the evidence of her steroid use has been evident, and generally accepted among track, and field fans for years.

Before 1988 Griffith Joyner was a good runner, but not special.  She was better in the 200 than the 100, and even won a silver medal in the 200 meters in the 1984 Olympics.  In the 100 she consistently ran around 11 seconds when she was at her best, and she had a career best of 10.96 going into 1988.  In the 200 meters she was usually running around 22 seconds at her best.  

Things changed in 1988.  Her look changed.  Take a look at her before 1987, and you will see a woman that looked very feminine compared to how she looked in 1988, or even late 87'.  By 88' she gained quite a bit of muscle, she got more ripped.  Gone was the more natural looking physique that she had at her first Olympics.  Flo Jo had become ripped.  You could see the drastic difference in her legs, and arms.  She also got some noticable facial hair.  Calling her facial hair a five o'clock shadow might be a bit of an exaggeration, but it was a noticable amount of hair that she struggled to cover with makeup.  Her facial structure also changed, as her jaw line became sharper, and more pronounced.  To go along with that, her voice got deeper.

Then there are the changes to her performance.  Going into the year her best time in the 200 was 21.96 from late 1987 in World Championships.  Before 1987 her best time was 22.04.  She beat that time 5 times in 1988.  In the Olympic semifinals she broke the world record by running a 21.56, and in the Olympic finals she destroyed that record with a 21.34.  Before her the record belonged the Heiki Dreshsler, an East German Woman, that admitted to using steroids, though she said that she didn't do it knowingly.  Even with East German women, notorious for steroid use, weren't close to what Flo Jo was.  

Her biggest advancement was in the 100 meters.  Like in the 200 meters she became unstoppable.   Her world record of 10.49 had a controversial wind reading, and it's accepted that it was windy, and that 0.0 m/s(meter per second) wind  reading for the race was a malfunction.    Even when you consider that, her 10.49 was still very impressive.   Going into the year her best time was 10.96, and adjusting for wind, and altitude her best race was 11.06 into a nice headwind, which adjusted equal 10.93.  In 1988 she beat that out 8 times.  Those races include the controversial 10.49 at the Olympics trials, which if I estimate a 5.2 m/s wind like the wind reading for the 9.78 that Carl Lewis ran the same day, still comes out the an adjusted 10.72.  3 of her other wind aided races were also better, adjusting for wind, than her previous best entering the year.  Those are a 10.60 at those same trials with a 3.2 m/s tailwind, a 10.70 in the Olympic semifinals with a 2.6 tailwind, and Olympic winning 10.54 with a 3.0 m/s tailwind.  She had 4 wind legal times which were more impressive than the best she previously did, and 3 that were clearly better.  There was the 10.89 she ran in San Diego, a 10.70 in the semifinals of the Olympics trials,  her "real world record" of 10.61 in the finals of the trials, and a 10.62 in the Olympics quarterfinals.  That means that in 8 of the 12 races she had in 100 that year, she was better adjusting for wind, and altitude, than she ever was before.  It's similar in the 200 meters.  It wasn't just that she was better than she was before, it was how much better she was, and how consistenly she was better.  This wasn't a one race aberation.  She went undefeated in both the 100, and 200 meters in 1988.  Now there are difference adjustments made for wind and altitude, and my numbers come from here Wind/Altitude correction in the 100m sprint (lmu.build).  You can get slightly different numbers from here Wind Calculator (maximmoinat.github.io).  It's just a wind calculator but since neither her best races before, or any of her 1988 races were run at high altitude, that not an issue.  Whatever the data, she was obviously a much better runner in 1988 than she was prior.

Joyner went through drastic changes in her physcial appearance, and her perfomance in 1988.  This happened in her late 20's, as she was 28, so this isn't some young athlete going through natural maturation.  Sprinters aren't supposed to get drastically better at that age.  The timing of her retirement was also suspicious.  After Ben Johnson's positive test for steroids in 88', there was a lot of attention arounds steroids in Track, and Field, and her abrupt retirement lead some to believe that she was avoiding more stringent test.  

Her death in 1997, which was caused by an epelictic seizure, doesn't need to be factored in a evidence.  The evidence from her change in look, and performance from 1988 are strong enough indicators.

Flo Jo's IAAF profile, where you can see all of her career results

Florence GRIFFITH-JOYNER | Profile (worldathletics.org)

                                                           

                                                      \

This Shit Is Crazy

 

I don't watch a bunch of basketball now.  At least not the current product.  Maybe it's advancedbeyond me.  I spend a good amount of time watching old sports games on youtube.  Right after the death of George Floyd, television became really annoying.  You just couldn't avoid the BLMpropoganda.  This made me less likley to watch basketball, though I do watch so important games.  Now in March of 2021, things have calmed down, but not enough.  I watchted much of  the NBA All Star Game, and, man, is the Social Justice shit heavy.  They needed to tell us about the money going to HBCU's.  They had students from Clark University singing the Black NationalAnthem, which was probably called the Negro National Anthem when it was made.  There was pandering during the game, and then the damn commercials.  They just kept it going, to the point that it became really agitating.  A watch some of the game on mute.   Back in the day the NBA on NBC would would announce that money would be sent to the United Negro College Fund in the name of the player  of the game.  ESPN has been a Sports, and Social Justice Network, going back to at least the 90's, so this shit isn't new, but it's just crazy now.  They don't give you a break.  It's like they believe it's their God given mission to throw this shit in your face, and force you to accept it. 

 

            

How Donald Trump Lost The Election

 Before Coronavirus hit, it seemed liked the Democrats weren't ready for Donald Trump.  From Trump's election win until early 2020, the Democrats just repeated the same mistakes.  Social Justice bullshit, and the identity politics that goes along with it.  Some things changed from the beginning of this year until election night that turned things around.  It's possible that we underestimated how much support the Democrats would have even before COVID became a big story.  Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote 4 years ago.

COVID

In Donald Trump's defense, we were being told in January that it wasn't a matter of if, but a matter of when in terms of the Coronavirus becoming a major problems in our country.  I can name plenty sound reasons other than plain incompetence.  We have the third largest population of any country.  We have great stat tracking, and a great capacity for testing,  and unlike China, we aren't a communist country.  In terms of population the only countries with a higher population are China, India.  China is a communist country that isn't transparent with it's data.  It was that lack of transparency that caused the virus to spread even further from Wuhan.  Their number of listed cases and deaths are incredibly low, and honestly we can't trust their numbers.  India is a poorer country that despite.  With all of that being said Trump hasn't seemed to take this virus seriously.  He has downplayed it, and regularly shows support for groups that have had big gatherings during the pandemic.  Have the Democrats been hypocritical on this?  Yes they have.  They supported BLM/Antifa riots that were far worse than any conservative gatherings, but the Dems don't get called on their bullshit that often, so Trump took a hit in terms of public perception.

Those Riots

The Riots which peaked right after the death of George Floyd set off a crazy reaction of white guilt, and black radicalism.  It was everywhere.  We were constantly being reminded of it whether it was on news stations, sports channels, or even channels like the Disney Channel.  After this it was easy for the democrats to sell how big this election was.  They went out of their way to do it.  Commercials telling people to vote were clearly aimed at those on the left.  

The Tide Changed A While Ago 

The 2020 election marks the 7th time in the past 8 elections that the Democratic candidate has won the popular vote, and only one of those, Gore vs Bush in 2000, was really close.  The tied has been in their favor for a while, and the identity politics have worked.  In that way a Trump loss should have been the expected result, just based on recent history, or at least him losing the popular vote.  Other factors swung the polls even more in favor of Joe Biden.  The mainstream clearly leans left, and that has been the case for a long time now.  They effectively push their political viewpoints.  The top social media sites show favorability towards the left.  The tide has been going against the right wing for decades now.

He Has Lost The Election

Trump is yet to concede, and those on his side continue to push conspiracy theories, but all indication from the counting, and recounting is that Joe Biden has clearly won this election.  

2019 Crime Statistics Breakdown

 The crime stats for 2019 are out, having been released four days ago, so it's time for another breakdown of crime by race, more specifically murder by race.  

 

 https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls

First the single victim/single offender numbers.  Based on this chart  there were 3299 known instances of a white person being murdered in a single victim/single offender situation.  Of the 3216 in which the race of the offender is known  2594 have white offender.  That 80.7%, which is down from 82.3% last year, and the lowest from 2015-2019.  When it comes to black people it's 2574 of  2843, which is 90.5%, which is right in line with previous years.  It's also interesting that despite the fact that black people only make up 13.4% of the population, compared to white people making up 76.3%, black people black people still killed each other at an almost equal number to white people when just looking at the single victim/offender numbers.  In total there were 2948 of these murders with a known white offender, and 3218 with a black offender.   So in murders with 1 victim, and one perpetrator, black people are 6.2 times more likely to be the killer than white people.  Things are even worse when looking at the total stats for murders. This doesn't even take into the account the hispanic factor.  Despite hispanics not generally being considered white, according to the demographics from last year about 88% of hispanics in this country are listed as white.  In terms of black on white murder compared to white on black the chart shows 566 instances of a black person murdering a white person compared to just 246 the other way around.  A ratio of 2.3/1. 

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls

Next up is the numbers for total murder offenders.  Out of the 11493 in which a race is known, blacks made up 6425, which is 55.9%.   That is the worst I've even seen.  That percentage has gone up slightly, but steadily every year I've been checking.  It was 53.3% in 2015, 53.5 in 2016, 54.2 in 2017, and 54.9 in 2018.  Whites made up 4728 of murderers in those cases.   That means that black people were 7.7 times more likely to be murderers than white people in 2019.  I'm used to it being about 7 times more likely.

The mainstream portrays black people as the victims, and white as the perpetrators.  That's the where the focus has been.  That's where the attention has gone, but the numbers say otherwise.  That data makes the majority of mainstream, BLM, and SJWs look out of touch with reality when it comes to who tends to victimize who.  

United States Demographics

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219

Nick Cannon Controversy

Nick Cannon recent comments calling white people " a little less", and talking about them lacking compassion, because they lack melanin hasn't come out of nowhere.  This guy has been a Hotep for a while now.  It was like he could switch it off, and on.  Sometimes he got his Sikh on, and his reading the Isis Papers by Frances Cress Welsing, and other times he is hosting Wild -N- Out, and the Masked Singer.  On the Masked Singer, especially, Cannon is around mostly white people.  He able to switch back, and forth from Hotep racist Nick Cannon to the safe Nick Cannon, without consequence.  Imagine a white celebrity being an open white supremacist, yet still hosting a mainstream show.


If Nick Cannon would've just kept talking shit about white people things probably would be fine now, but he just had to bring the Jews into it.  It's interesting I listened to the full podcast of Cannon with Professor Griff, and he said much worse things about white, than about Jews, but that has gotten little attention in the mainstream.  Some black people have gotten on Cannon, and Desean Jackson for what they said about Jewish people, and Stephen Jackson for defending Desean, and some black people have taken their side.  Though most that take Cannon's side focus on their hatred of white people.  Anti Semetism, and Anti Whiteness are connected in the minds of Hoteps, Hebrew Israelites, and the NOI.  See these groups of black people view white Jews, and non black Jews in general as being imposters, and not real Jews.  They seem to have high reverence for the Bible, and ancient Hebrew culture, but they don't want to think that those people weren't black.  Trying to claim other people's identities isn't new in the black power movement.   It creates an interesting situation as these black supremacists celebrate and claim ancient group who weren't black.  Anti semitism in the black community is nothing new.  It's been going for a long time, and it is connected to anti whiteness.   It would be tough to find a mainstream article willing to connect the dots.  As hatred for white people has become more and more accepted it has led to more hatred of Jews.  I just wonder how things would've turned out if he said what he said about white people without bringing up Jews.

Yes Those Riots Played A Role In The Rising Of Coronavirus Cases

I guess when people aren't practicing social distancing, but doing it for "the right causes" the virus goes out of it's way not to spread.  Sense the sarcasm.
.
You may or may not have read about a study saying that the protest following the death of George Floyd haven't caused the increase of coronavirus cases.

This is that study
https://www.nber.org/papers/w27408.pdf

The popular thing to blame is reopening.  It's easy to blame white Republicans, especially Donald Trump.  There is a serious problem with that theory though.  The White House revealed the plan for reopening in April.  Reopening really began gaining momentum after April 30, and in May it became common, but the numbers didn't go up.  In fact when the weather got warm in May the number of new cases went down.  So if reopening is the main cause for the spike in coronavirus cases, why did it take so long?  We were staying steady until the middle of June when the numbers began spiking.  This is according to the CDC's data.  If it was reopening itself that caused this then why it take two months for the numbers to just spike up?

We know happened in June.  The protest/riots were out of control.  It seems more likely to me that is what's behind the rise of cases, than it is that reopening is to blame.  So what to make of the study that says it wasn't to blame?  The study's data is really conclusive.  The graphs on pages 48, and 49 show that all of those cities had an increase in cases after the riots, but most, if not all, had similar increases before. It's also too early to know the real impact of the riots in terms of spreading coronavirus in those areas.  If, as the study says, other people were more likely to stay at home, then it's still possible that many protestors, who tended to be young and healthy, are asymptomatic, and spreading the virus unknowingly.

 The biggest effect that the protest/riots had on the number coronavirus cases was in how it changed the culture.  Before the death of George Floyd became big news, coronavirus was the biggest story.  It was being thrown in our faces over and over again.  You couldn't escape it.  After the chaos started following the Floyd's death, coronavirus took a backseat.  Now we were being bombarded with stories of supposed police brutality, systematic racism, and people were hunting for stories of evil, racist, white people.  The riots were constantly in the news, and spreading all over the world, sort of the COVID-19 ironically enough.  All of a sudden the virus wasn't big news anymore, and it's easy to see how people took their eye off the ball.  

The Riots themselves was partially the product of people not caring that much about COVID, especially the looters, and those that fought with other people.  Many people were ready to move on from virus, and for the anti racism movement, causing havoc, and regularly demonizing white people may have been them getting back to normal.  The weather was hot, and until the protests cases had gone down substantially from where it was at in April.  The chaos, and all the attention it got exacerbated the issue, and caused people to care less about the coronavirus.  There could be room for two hot button issues to get good attention, but lockdown, and race riots are very different.  Lockdown succeeded in lowering numbers due to the fear of the virus.  The riots went as far as they did because there was less fear of the virus among those participants.

Left wingers who were so adamant about social distancing and quarantine in April, were usually quiet or in agreement with BLM.  They showed their hand.  I guess we found out what can make them not stand by their convictions in terms of coronavirus.  Black People!   Predictably the mainstream got right back to coronavirus panic.  Conveniently it was after the riots had calmed down.  It was so easy for them to talk that shit, and shame people when those people were white Trump supporters.   Right wingers were ready to move on before the left wingers were, but focus on race took the political party that was most concerned with the coronavirus, and turned their attention elsewhere.

The news isn't all bad.  Though the numbers of daily cases has gone over 50,000 the past couple days, the number of deaths have yet to go up.  Perhaps that number will go up in the upcoming weeks, but even before the increase in cases the percentage of diagnosed cases that resulted in deaths had been going down.  The number of people who recovered from the virus is going up. While the true number of COVID-19 cases in our country is a lot higher than the listed number, it's also true that the number of people who have recovered is also a lot higher.  It makes sense that those who are asymptomatic, or only have mild symptoms are less likely to be tested.


https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/stay-top-stay-home-list-statewide

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/us/states-reopen-coronavirus-trnd/