What she wrote then is relevant if it's consistent with what she says and what she does now. From what I've heard from her so far (which isn't much), and what was reported at the link, she hasn't changed much.
"Regardless of the circumstances under which I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."Yeah yeah, those ivy league schools are just awash in vicious racism. How painful it must have been for her, how did she manage to survive, knowing when a white student talked to her, he might be thinking of her as a black student attending Princeton, rather than a student who is black and attending Princeton.
Is this the kind of crap you can get away with as a thesis at Princeton?
"In essence, in order to advance in their careers or post-graduate studies, respondents realize they must be able to get along with their co-workers or classmates who are likely to be White, thereby identifying more with Whites.Speaking as a scientist myself, Michelle Obama committed the cardinal sin of conducting a study by putting forth a conclusion first and then trying to find facts that back it up. That's not the way it's done. She admitted her bias before collecting her data, possibly skewing it. Do all liberals work this way? It would explain a lot.
I began this study questioning my own attitudes as a future alumnus. I wondered whether or not my education at Princeton would affect my identification with the Black community. I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with Whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that Black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the Black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility."
Reading a bit further into her conclusions, I find them to be incredibly slanderous to blacks in general. She is making the black students attending Princeton seem like emotionally fragile whiners who see nothing but white people oppressing them at every turn. Did other non-white students feel like this or just blacks? She doesn't even go there. To her, only the responses from black students mattered. It would have been quite illuminating had she bothered to collect responses from other non-white students and compared the results. I can only wonder.
To research her thesis, the future Mrs. Obama sent an 18-question survey to a sampling of 400 black Princeton graduates, requesting the respondents define the amount of time and "comfort" level spent interacting with blacks and whites before they attended the school, as well as during and after their University years. Other questions dealt with their individual religious beliefs, living arrangements, careers, role models, economic status, and thoughts about lower class blacks. In addition, those surveyed were asked to choose whether they were more in line with a "separationist and/or pluralist" viewpoint or an "integrationist and/or assimilationist" ideology.Actually, because Michelle's survey of 400 was only responded to by 90 of the black alumni, 22% findings, she can not claim that those do or do not support anything beyond themselves. That the 22% responding black alumni did not identify with the black community applies to themselves, not necessarily to the 78% who did not respond. Those 78% who refused to respond tell their own tale. That silent majority sang a song without words that Michelle chose to ignore and omit from her findings.
Just under 90 alums responded to the questionnaires (for a response rate of approximately 22 percent) and the conclusions were not what she expected. "I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility."
-by Maverick Muse
I don't care about the topic. You should have seen the dreck that my fellows were doing for their thesis topics. What offends me is the language. Didn't she have someone to edit this thing?
Speaking as a scientist myself, Michelle Obama committed the cardinal sin of conducting a study by putting forth a conclusion first and then trying to find facts that back it up. That's not the way it's done.
It is in sociology. This is Ph.D.-level stuff for the wussmanities and socialist "sciences." Absolute total dreck. There is no hope for academia as long as they indulge in this twaddle.
While I'm at it, I am really tired of people ooohing and aaahing over a Harvard law degree. You go into law school for one of two reasons: To make a lot of money or because math is too tough. There's virtually no international competition in law schools, unlike grad schools in the sciences, where American kids have to compete against much better educated students from every corner of the world.
If I had a lobotomy, the piece they would take out would be able to graduate Harvard law.
Predominately white universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the white students comprising the bulk of their enrollments.To illustrate the latter statement, she pointed out that Princeton (at the time) had only five black tenured professors on its faculty, and its "Afro-American studies" program "is one of the smallest and most understaffed departments in the university."
In addition, she said only one major university-recognized group on campus was "designed specifically for the intellectual and social interests of blacks and other third world students."
Speller* Yes, this is what I expected her to think.
This is what Canadian Blacks think, that they should have special "Black Studies" and "Black Targeted Goodies" because the are, for want of a better description, Black.
*Back to the article at Politico
She quotes the work of sociologists James Conyers and Walter Wallace, who discussed "integration of black official(s) into various aspects of politics" and notes "problems which face these black officials who must persuade the white community that they are above issues of race and that they are representing all people and not just black people," as opposed to creating "two separate social structures."
Speller* Well I'll be dipped in Dog@#%$!
She complains there isn't enough separate "Black" specific social structure at Princeton while noting it could be a problem facing black officials to "persuade" the white community that they are above caring about creating two separate social structures.
Is she schizoid or really what is the word for someone like this, without using the word Liberal or a variation thereof?
Sociology can be real scienceI suppose. Under strict laboratory conditions, under which the sociologists are reared in isolation from one another that it could hope to become a shadow of what might resemble a science.
In practice, however, this does not happen. Moreover, sociology and all of the humanities and social sciences are diseased beyond repair. There's no bringing them back. It's like de Tocqueville and robbing from the treasury. Once the H&SSers discovered their methods could be used to influence public policy, there is no going back to what could be actual science, in theory.
Biology is going down the same road with medicine-show-like promises of cures and climatology has finally gone over the edge with their non-falsifiable hypothesis. With mathematics, you have one standard: proof.
Metaphysical certainty, every single time.
Only two generations ago, mathematics was dominated by dangerous leftist loners who eventually got together to found the modern "peace" movement.
(a) It was hardly a movement created by mathematicians. (b) They didn't use mathematical proofs to buttress their arguments. And I don't care if a bunch of mathematicians are leftists. They'll be doing math. The Unabomber was a mathematician and he had endless tracts on...environmentalism. Nobody knew what he had done for a living because it wasn't relevant.
Plus, any idiot can do sociology. You don't see kids saying, "Dude, I'm gonna flunk out. I just can't handle that soc. class, man. I mean, the prof showed this movie in class and I just can't understand all of the hard concepts, ya know? Maybe I'll just wimp out and change my major to physics."
I read it...all it is is this little poem. Go figure.
Dark and lonely on the summer night.
Kill my landlord, kill my landlord.
Watchdog barking - Do he bite?
Kill my landlord, kill my landlord.
Slip in his window,
Break his neck!
Then his house
I start to wreck!
Got no reason --
What the heck!
Kill my landlord, kill my landlord.
My land - lord ...
-by E Buzz Miller-Booth
OK that last one was just silly. But the general thrust is pretty good analysis: sociology is a joke, she presumed her conclusions and took only the data that supported it, and is demanding special treatment that must take the form of being treated the same.
The puzzling thing to me about the whole thesis and it's many adherents and arguers in other forms is the contradiction. Identity groups (this isn't just about blacks) demand to be treated special or different based on their group: I want a role playing gamers' student union, we must have a left handed redheads studies department, why doesn't this university have more short albino epileptics teaching medieval literature?
Then, when they are treated differently, they become upset because they aren't part of the crowd, that they feel left out, isolated, unique, uncomfortable. Not only is feeling uncomfortable an inevitable, and perhaps proper way to feel depending on your particular group (wearing dresses as a man, lovers of goats, RPG players, etc) but the truth is feeling uncomfortable, unwelcome, or like an outsider is not anybody's problem but your own
. What was it your mom said? If you feel like a loner, it's up to you to make friends? It is quite simply not the job of everyone else on earth to make you feel comfortable or to avoid making you feel offended, particularly if you get that way at the drop of a hat.
The truth is, everyone, everywhere feels alone and outside the crowd, everyone feels like they are an outsider at least some times. It's not exactly unusual for people to feel this way around the age of high schoolers and even in college. There's a reason this age group is so targeted by advertising and fads: most people want badly to fit in and be accepted, to not stand out as being unusual or weird. You can sell to this group by making your latest gadget seem cool or your clothes seem like everyone who is anyone wears them. You can shame people into buying your product by claiming those who don't are losers. You can lie to people by saying women will rip their clothes off and leap on you if you use this metrosexual body spray. And it works
with this age group. Some people never grow out of it.
The thing is, feeling that way doesn't mean there's necessarily anything wrong with the culture around you. It may just mean you are a normal young person who needs to learn to reach out better. Certainly reaching out better is true for all sides of any equation,
And reaching out is where much of the identity group problem is. Michelle Obama is black, she feels like the white Princeton people are alien to her and her thought processes, that they are different and thus she needs to have her concerns addressed. Princeton, obviously, must make an effort to be more black and thus make blacks more comfortable.
The problems with this are manifold, but the two that stand out the most are troubling to me. First, I cannot imagine Martin Luther King jr who made the magnificent dream speech wanting blacks to believe they are so alien to whites that they think
differently, that they need to be separated into different dorms, study groups, student unions. That the way for America to help blacks is to be more black. I see serious problems with the idea that blacks are such a different people that they cannot even be comprehended by whites, that blackness is not just culturally distinct, but alien
to whites. This pushes up against the old, old evils of racism that declared blacks and whites separate people, like elves and humans rather than humans and humans. That blacks are actually a distinct race rather than a variation of shared humanity.
Surely this isn't what Mrs Obama believes or wants, is it? Yet this is the path that the identity group politics leads to: you cannot understand, we are unique, you must accommodate us, we are incomprehensible to you, you have to simply believe what we say and agree.
The second problem is the assumption that there's White America and Black America. It's true that there is a distinction in culture between different groups: blacks in Los Angeles, Hispanics in Houston, Asians in Seattle, whites in Topeka. The thing is, blacks in Detroit are distinct from that LA group as well, and they're different yet from New Orleans blacks who are different from ones in Queens. The difference isn't based on some ethnic hard wired part of black genetics, it's cultural
and shifts from place to place. There's not one black America and one White America. Put a white guy from Laguna with a white guy from Boston and see how well they interact. The language
is practically different.
The cultural differences are in fact self-imposed. You don't have
to talk with the local slang, dress in the local fashions, listen to the local top hits, and so on. The presumption that because you were raised in Watts then you're genetically coded to be this way and further not only cannot but must
not change is utterly absurd. You want to fit in? Stop being so much of the sore thumb, or get used to being considered different. A british man in Princeton would feel sort of out of place too, the accent, the differences in language, the clothing, the pop culture references all would be unique to him. Yet somehow he can learn to fit in. When people move to different parts of the country, they learn to be a part of that cultural group, usually. Sure, the Texas accent is unusual to you at first, but you can learn it and in a few years talk like a native. That's how it works.
Yet Michelle Obama seems to demand that Princeton be the unique setting, or that the whole world be different and blacks be exempt. If you grew up a certain way and have dusky skin, then you're imprinted for eternity in this pattern and must not
change. It's the same goofy concept as the Star Trek Prime Directive: never interfere with a culture, let them be who they are and only change at their own rate! Unless you're Captain Kirk them bomb, interfere, and breed with every lovely alien lass.
This goofy version of sociology is what leads to the conclusions Mrs Obama apparently still
runs her life by, with statements about never feeling proud of America before. This idea that America really isn't your
country because you are black and "white" culture rules the national society is just wrong. It's not white
culture if it's the dominant culture. It's American
culture, and if you choose not to be a part of that, that's up to you, but don't demand everyone adapt to you or get upset that you don't fit in.
The concept of America that for centuries was the foundation: blending many cultures into one - E Pluribus Unum - has been so successfully challenged and demonized by the left that today it's considered insulting and offensive to say "hey, why do you have to act so different" or even "you know, if you learned to speak normally you might get a job easier." No nation can stand so divided for long, no country can be so balkanized that everyone grabs their identity group and demands everyone accept them without change and offense and continue as a unified nation for long.
Ideally, whites will adapt good aspects and ideas, music, food, and fashion from blacks, and vice versa, and between the two (and all the other identity groups), one culture can result, with regional distinctions into a single united blend. And despite these efforts, the US really does have a single culture that shifts and moves with the times. Let's hope it continues, and the deliberate efforts to fracture the culture for political gain never succeeds.