The Jewish Story Of New York Marathon Director Fred Lebow

I grew up a Seventh-Day Adventist in Australia. In May of 1977, when I was turning 11, I moved with my parents to Pacific Union College in the Napa Valley (where I lived for the next three years and returned to frequently during high school when I lived in Auburn, CA). I was running a mile or two a day at the time and as a way of adjusting to my new home, I began racing long distance in 1978-1979, finishing five marathons (26 miles 385 yards each).

As was my bent, I read many books and magazines on running. There I kept encountering stories about Fred Lebow, the director of the New York City marathon. I always skipped these stories as much as I could. I had no interest in Fred Lebow. I had no interest in such icky self-promoters. I had no interest in tribal identity.

In late 1979, I developed Osgood Schlatter’s disease and had to quit running. That was devastating because at the time running was my primary source of self-esteem.

After 1984, I was able to run again, but never went longer than three miles. In 1988, I got sick with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and haven’t been able to run since without getting a CFS relapse. As a result, it’s painful for me to immerse myself in that world. I don’t read or watch much about running anymore.

In 1989, I became interested in Judaism and eventually converted to the religion of the Jewish people.

I notice that exploring Jewish identity is a favorite theme in the media (exploring white identity, by contrast, is a horrible thing) but I also get why many non-Jews are sick of it. What’s with this tribal obsession? It’s so contrary to the WASP worldview. Christians love to talk about how much they love Jesus but they rarely talk about their Christian identity. Jews rarely talk about how much they love God, but they love to talk about being Jewish.

The other day, I watched the Netflix documentary on Fred Lebow called “Run For Your Life.”

Fred was born Fischel Lebowitz in 1932 in Romania. He and his family escaped the Holocaust and moved to New York.

A friend remembers Fred in the late 1960s when Lebow worked in the knockoff schmatta business: “All these women were models and they were tugging at his shoulders. I don’t know if he had that set up.”

Friend: “Fred had more girlfriends than anyone I knew.”

To a WASP, working in a fashion knock-off business would have been too humiliating to contemplate as would arranging models to publicly tug at you all night. Many things that are abhorrent to the WASP (and the German Jew) are common to the Ashkenazi Jew. WASPs lack chutzpah. Perhaps that is a reason why WASPs are in decline and Jews are in ascendancy.

Fred could talk about himself without end and he knew how to manipulate people so that he would be the constant center of attention. Fred had no wife or kids. He liked playing around too much.

Peter Roth, Treasurer of the New York City Road Runners Club: “His identity in the world was all about confusing people.”

“It was all about mirrors and shells and moving things around and hiding things. He did that to create the first five borough marathon. He knew that we needed people to believe in us. And we didn’t have anything to believe in yet except for his vision of how great it was going to be. So he assured everybody that the numbers were there for everyone. And he even made up numbers. And he assured the runners that we had plenty of support, plenty of sponsors. We didn’t have it.”

Howard Rubenstein: “The Road Runners and Fred were broke.”

Charlie McCabe: “Fred was out there looking for money. I guess the garment center produces a different sort of salesperson.”

Friend: “Fred felt like he was a missionary, to convert people to the marathon.”

Friend: “He was like a rock star. He had a personality that women were attracted to.”

Anne Roberts, Fred’s former employee at the Road Runners Club: “We were traveling to Amsterdam. We were sitting in the lounge at JFK. Fred said to me, ‘When we go to the gate, you walk ahead of me. I don’t want people to think that we’re together. You’re too old for me, Anne.’ And I’m about 20 years younger than Fred.”

Fred: “I get bored with women easily. That’s the main problem. Once I have achieved anything in life, I’m not satisfied with it. I love the chase.”

This Lebow documentary reminds me uncomfortably of my own story. Kinda like that movie Greenberg (2010).

Near the end of his life, Fred went back to the name “Fischel Lebowitz.”

Posted in Adventist, Christianity, Jews, Running, WASPs | Comments Off

When Do Children Rebel?

Blog: My theory: a child will adopt a parents’ tastes and values and outlook in inverse correlation with the narcissism of that parent. If a parent is a blowhard — of high or low IQ — who can never admit his mistakes, his child is likely to adopt an opposite outlook. And vice versa.
If a parent is too rigid in his or her thinking, the child will see that and instinctively go in an opposite direction. And if the parent is loathsome in his hypocrisy, that will also drive the child (or anyone else) away.

Posted in parenting | Comments Off

Why Do Men & Women Lie?

Alison Armstrong tells Dennis Prager: “We’re born liars.

“There are three main instincts that humans share with all other critters and there’s an order: Procreate, protect, provide.”

“We’ll do dangerous things to procreate that we would not do to protect and to provide.”

“The masculine will lie to fulfill his sex drive. There’s deception, exaggeration, manipulation. That gets a lot of press.”

“There’s not as much of a stink that women do this equally. It’s just different. Our procreative drive shows up less in sex than in being all about babies. We’ll lie about using birth control to get pregnant. We’ll lie about the father of our babies to get the best one to provide and protect for our babies. We steal babies.”

“We’ll lie to protect ourselves from the things we fear such as fear, abandonment. We’ll lie to fit in.”

“When we love someone, when we’re strongly attracted to someone, we will be more likely to lie.”

Posted in alison armstrong, Dennis Prager | Comments Off

Are Jews Responsible For All The Wars In The World?

IN 2006, according to a police report, Hollywood star Mel Gibson asked the arresting officer if he was Jewish and then said: “F**king Jews. The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world.”

Until WWII, Jews lacked the influence, generally speaking, to push a country into war.

Until WWII, the United States had a strong isolationist streak. After WWII, that attitude was portrayed as irresponsible and America become the world’s policeman. Today, the average American strikes me as uninterested in invading more countries. American Jews, however, tend to care about Israel. Some of them care more about Israel than about America. Speaking as a converted member of the tribe, let me tell you that it’s exciting to have your own country in the Middle East. It’s better than rooting for your favorite football team.

Jews who care about Israel are going to push for the United States to become more involved in the world and to funnel aid to Israel and to support Israel against its enemies and to want to flatten Israel’s enemies with American might. Ironically, as Steve Sailer points out, the more the United States becomes involved in the Middle East, the less it can afford to be strongly allied with Israel. Without other involvements, the US can relate to Israel as a charity case.

So would 9/11 have happened without the U.S. involvement with Israel? I doubt it. Would America have invaded Afghanistan without Jewish neo-conservatives pushing for it? Probably. Would America have invaded Iraq in 2003 without this? Probably not.

A Jewish friend says about America:

We’d be involved in the mideast for sure since they have oil. But it is a mistake to blame all of our foreign misadventures on the Jews. Did “the Jews” irresistibly command LBJ to send 500,000 Americans to Vietnam? Also plenty of Jews opposed the war in Iraq. The man who sent Americans there was a WASP Christian, not a Jew. All of our involvement in avoidable wars has been contrived by WASPS. All of them. Perhaps we should ask “Would America have squandered its strength had Jews been running the place?”

Another Jewish friend says:

Until recently Jews lacked the influence to shape any nation’s policies regarding war.

It is also questionable whether the U.S. never participated in wars until the 20th century.

In 1804 we fought the Barbary pirates in North Africa.

In 1812 we initiated the War of 1812 to annex Canada.

In 1846 we fought the Mexican war leading to the annexation of much of the Southwest United States including where we live today.

In 1898 we fought the Spanish American war which allowed the U.S. to claim Puerto Rico and the Phillipines as colonies. (and then we fought a several year guerilla war in the Phillipines itself)

I don’t think Jews were behind any of these wars.

Of the major historical battles, from the Persian-Greek wars up through Trafalgar and Waterloo, I don’t think there was any significant Jewish involvement. (although Napoleon did liberate the Jews from ghettos in countries the French conquered as part of his public position that he was the successor leader of the French Revolution.) (and as a result of his own sources for private intelligence on the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo, Nathan Rothschild, made a financial killing on the outcome)

Jews were not involved in the American Revolution, nor the French Revolution, nor in any of the internal struggles of England in the battles for succession between Mary Queen of Scots and Elizabeth I, or when Oliver Cromwell took power, or during the Jacobin struggles or Germany, either when Prussia became the dominant state and Germany was unified. Jews had been expelled from Spain in 1492 and played no role in the expansion of the Spanish Empire. The Dutch, German, English, Spanish and French empires with their vast overseas colonies, many of which were conquered militarily, were not engineered by Jews or Jewish interests.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off

Did The Nazis Believe Jews Were Inferior?

I find it a chore to listen to Dennis Prager these days. Not because Dennis has changed, but I have changed.

On his radio show today, Dennis Prager struggled to define “racism”: “You believe that race has intrinsic qualities, usually negative. The Nazis believed that Jews were born with bad qualities, inferior qualities. That Jews were inferior. They had a racist anti-Semitism.”

“In today’s world, there aren’t many racists. How many people believe it is inherent to having that skin color?”

“Are any stereotypes accurate? For example, are Asians, from the perspective of the American driver, worse drivers?”

“It is racist to believe that inherent to being Asian is a certain type of driving.”

This racist belief is obviously true. It is inherent to East Asians to be, on average, more cautious than whites who are in turn more cautious than blacks.

Dennis says that “recent African immigrants have crime rates no different from any other group.”

Here’s the news from Switzerland: “From this [2010] study it became clear that crime rate is highly correlated on the country of origin of the various migrant groups. Thus, immigrants from Germany, France and Austria had a significantly lower crime rate than Swiss citizens (60% to 80%), while immigrants from Angola, Nigeria and Algeria had a crime rate of above 600% of that of Swiss population.”

Dennis: “I do believe that certain cultures are superior to others.”

“It’s not easy to be a racist. You have to be actively stupid.”

“Racism is really evil. You shouldn’t cheapen the phrase.”

Luke: Yes, the Nazis called Jews untermenschen aka rats, parasites or vermin, but the Nazis thought of Jews as inferior morally, not inferior in intelligence and achievement. The Nazis resented the Jews for their high participation rate in satire (mocking traditional German values and practices and racial solidarity) and for promoting alien ideologies such as communism and in particular Russian Bolshevism.

Domen writes:

“They hated Jews because Jews was seen by the Nazis as the worst race in the world.”

That was just what the Nazis told to the masses of brainwashed and uneducated German people whom they wanted to manipulate.

But in fact the Nazis hated Jews because they considered them as superior to them and thus threatening their plans for world domination.

The Nazi propaganda said “they are inferior”, but they were thinking “they are superior and thus threatening our plans for world domination.”

The Nazis believed, that it was “Jewish conspiracy” which caused the German defeat in WW1. They considered Jews as very influential.

According to Hitler, Jews had to be eliminated because they were considered as dangerous for his planned “German World Domination”.

“The Nazis believed, that it was ‘Jewish conspiracy’ which caused the German defeat in WW1. They considered Jews as very influential. I don’t think so. Jews were just a scapegoat… Everybody knew it was the Emperor and the Army that lost the war.”

Indeed – Germans (including also Austria) lost WW1 due to their own indolence.

But they blamed the Jews (who were just 1% of entire population of Germany – even though a very influential one percent) for their defeat, because it was very self-justifying to blame someone else for their own failures, especially if they could blame someone as influential as Jews.

In other words – by blaming the Jews, Germans were healing their own deeply rooted inferiority complexes.

One of those deep German inferiority complexes was their strong belief that they were a superior peoples and a world’s leading nation, which was contradicted by brutal reality, in which Germany did not have as much colonies and as much “living space” as other great powers.

Particularly British and French Empires were the source of German inferiority complexes. But also the USA and the huge Russian Empire.

German people believed that Russians did not deserve their territorially huge empire, because they “were unable to manage it properly”. Germans claimed, that Germans could allegedly manage each square mile of territory more efficiently than Slavic (including Russian) and Jewish people.

This is why the “Lebensraum” plan during WW2 included the deportation of “badly organized” Russians from European Russia to Asia.

So German anti-Semitism was about healing their complexes and explaining the cognitive dissonance they were experiencing between their own excessive belief concerning their self-importance (i.e. most Germans falsely believed that they were “special” and “superior” to others) and the reality (in which Germany did not have such an important position as selfish and excessively nationalistically proud German people wanted).

As the result of their excessive pride, looking down on others and silly beliefs, Germans started another WW, lost it, and got humiliated again.

German jealousness towards Britain, France and Russia and their bigger empires, was also among the factors leading to WW1.

This is only such a psychological approach to the causes of the initial rise and the subsequent collapse of Nazi Germany, of course.

From the political and military perspective, those events were much more complex.

George* emails Luke: “The more extreme actions of the Nazis were wrong. I’ll just point out that at that time in Germany, Jews, despite being a minuscule percentage of the population, had great, great power and advocated for the types of things for Germany that they advocate (generally speaking) throughout the Western World today; the exception is in their country of Israel. When a tiny population has such great money and power and has a conflicting culture and political orientation, only bad things can happen.”

Posted in Anti-Semitism, asians, Blacks, Dennis Prager, Germany, Jews, Race | Comments Off

What Happened To WASPs?

Blog: A nice Jewish lady once told me, when I was at a Club Med, “You probably think of yourself as a man first, then maybe after that as your occupation, then after that as your ethnicity. What you don’t understand is that Jews think of themselves as Jews first, second, and third.”

I wouldn’t argue with that. The Jewish drive to power, both the personal and group varieties, has completely overtaken the hapless WASPs.

Think of the people you know. Jewish people with IQ’s of 120 or higher tend to do things which will in some way, no matter how obliquely, help further Jewish influence. They become labor lawyers. Or corporate lawyers. Or criminal lawyers. Or they become doctors affiliated with hospitals where they can help set policy. Or they become newspapermen, or work for a network. They become aides to Congressmen and help write legislation. Or they work for a TV show, or go to work for a talent agency. In business, they start as middlemen, then find a way to leverage that into becoming owners. Or, they just go directly to Wall Street. They become academics, and teach pliable young college students how to think. Or they become economists.

Eventually, most of the Ivy League universities end up with Jewish Presidents, and most of the major sports leagues end up with Jewish commissioners, and half the talking heads you see on TV are Jewish, and most powerful Hollywood producers are Jewish, and all of the recent heads of the Federal Reserve Bank are Jewish. And after a while, it seems as if those positions are no longer even open to Anglos.

Jewish people succumb to mental illness, too. But if it’s just an ordinary neurosis they have, instead of letting it cripple them, they always seem to somehow harness it to climb even further.

Now think of the Anglos you know with IQ’s over 120. They tend to pursue more Quixotic callings. They become ornithologists, or herpetologists, or zoologists of some sort, and strangely, develop an affection for those species. And they spend much of their lives in the field, practically invisible to other people. Or they get involved in environmental causes, which affect the balance of power between people and other creatures, but not between different peoples. Or they become engineers and work for companies which are ultimately bought and sold by Jewish financiers.

* Blog: If an Anglo accuses a Jewish person of somehow favoring his own, or of trying to undermine the goyim, however, the accusation never sticks. Instead, the focus gets completely turned on the Anglo for his perceived anti-Semitism. If the Anglo is prominent, Abraham Foxman will land on his back like a hungry wolverine dropping out of a tree. The Anglo will then have to apologize, grovel, scrape, and explain how he has seen the error of his ways.

Then, he’ll probably lose his job anyway.

It is completely irrelevant whether the Anglo’s original accusation is true. (This blogger’s opinion: it never is, otherwise we’d see disproportionate numbers of Jewish people in positions of power and an inordinate amount of our foreign aid funneled towards Israel.)

There’s a lesson here for the Anglos: the best defense is a good offense. If you’re incredibly aggressive about protecting your own ethnic interests anytime anyone points out how aggressive you are about protecting your own ethnic interests, eventually everybody will be too cowed to point it out.

* Blog: He replied, “How would a girl be able to tell? Women are generally only capable of received opinions.

Posted in Jews, WASPs | Comments Off

How To Use Twitter

I sometimes look over my new followers and wonder if they want to date me.

DCThrowback writes to Steve Sailer:

1.) Utilize the mute button for people whom you follow but who do not tweet much of value. They’ll never know they’ve been muted.

2.) Using other people’s lists enables you to be able to read people w/o following them. If you create a list, you can mute people in your main timeline, but you read them when you want. For example, let’s say you’re a fan of UCLA football. You can follow some national and local writers to get up to date info on the team, but you don’t want it clogging up your tweets from @glaivester on the national question, so you can mute them regularly if you don’t want to hear about some UCLA beat guy complaining about airport coffee.

Follow all the writers, mute ‘em, then put them on a Sailer UCLA CFB list. Then on Saturday night, you click over after/during the game, you see the instant reactions, but they don’t clog up your timeline on Wed at midnight.

3.) I follow an absurd amount of people, some of whom rarely tweet. The karmic followback is a nice touch. Bottom line: people who tweet out personal stuff, unless humorous or interesting rarely do well. It’s mostly a meritocracy among the high IQ set. And they give their nuggets or ideas away for free, which is amazing to me. If the price of that is a link to their latest article, I am totally okay with that trade.

4.) Must follows from the Sailer comment threads include @danfromdc, @dpinsen, @sobl1, @heartiste, @glaivester, @mangan150 etc. There are likely more, esp among the NRx set, but that’s a great start.

Posted in Twitter | Comments Off

Are R. Barry Freundel’s Orthodox Conversions Still Valid?

I ask historian Marc B. Shapiro: “What do you think of the RCA coming out with a quick statement that all of R. Freundel’s conversions are valid? I suspect haredim now have even more reason to dismiss all MO conversions.”

Marc responds: “Why shouldn’t they be valid. He was not a public violator of Jewish law, so as far as halakhah is concerned, what is done remains valid.”

Selwyn: “We should encourage converts – and welcome them in. Judaism is global (all peoples prayed at the Temple in Jerusalem), pro-peace (we pray for it constantly – in every service), the original environmentalists (Tu Bishvat ) and we have much to offer adherents and society. We also believe sincerely that any path to a legitimate peace-loving God is to be embraced.”

Chaim Amalek: Instead of calling this a “conversion,” I think we ought to follow modern idioms and call it a “neshama reassignment.” We would then call “converts” “TransYidden”.

Posted in Conversion, R. Barry Freundel | Comments Off

I Want To Understand How Los Angeles Orthodox Jews Use The Bankruptcy Game

A week ago, I posted about the $7.25 million fraud judgment against Antony Gordon (attorney, hedge fund king, motivational speaker, Orthodox rabbi) and his Chapter Seven bankruptcy.

I’ve never had any money and given my WASP background, I’ve never been comfortable with the buccaneering approach to finance so I’m totally out to sea when I try to understand how Orthodox Jews roll.

My interest here is primarily poetic. I want to know the Orthodox Jewish bankruptcy filing as a literary genre. You don’t read a love note the same way you read a gas bill and you don’t analyze a rabbi’s Chapter Seven filing the same way you would a black man’s filing.

Before I begin, let me just say that it would be for the best if the goyim read no further.

Now, let’s say you have five kids in Jewish day school and you roll up $400,000 in credit card debt living like a mentch. You find yourself in a bit of bother and you’d like a clean slate. As a God-fearing Orthodox Jew, you have a divine obligation to live as well as you can, to provide for your family and friends, to donate to Torah and to express the light of HaShem wherever you go. This costs a pretty shekel and business does not always go well and so you might find yourself on a sticky wicket with 18 runs to chase and just three balls to go before the end of the match.

So you pray to God, you meditate, you get in touch with your feelings, you find your conscience, you consult with the wisdom of your ancestors, you seek guidance from the sacred text and you talk to the various rabbis you’ve supported over the years and you begin to see that you did not accumulate this outrageous amount of debt, God did. You’re the victim! Now the heavens part and you see opportunities in a well-done bankruptcy. The gematria of “bankruptcy” is “redemption.”

You have assets but you want to be rid of your creditors. What’s a Yid to do?

Let’s say you have $500,000 in assets but $1,000,000 in debts and you want to keep some of the good things you own. So when you report your debts, you list off all these Orthodox Jews you owe money to so that you inflate your debts to, say, $6,000,000. Now your goyisha creditors think, “Ohmygod, this guy is really upside down. We’ll take any deal he offers us.” So you defraud your creditors by inventing debts you hold to friends.

You’ll notice on Antony Gordon’s bankruptcy filing that many of his creditors are Othodox Jewish friends such as attorney David Schwarcz, Richard Horowitz, Tony Namvar. I am sure Rabbi Gordon is on the up and up, but less ethical people are prone to abuse this process.

The judge in his case is named “Deborah J. Saltzman.” How wonderful are the ways of God!

The one thing, however, that bankruptcy cannot discharge is a fraud judgment.

Rabbi Menachem Gottesman of Harkham Hillel fame has a son who declared a bankruptcy about a four years (with credit card debt around $300,000) that was a thing of poetic beauty only equaled in the Jewish tradition by the prophet Isaiah.

In the late 1990s, accountant and real estate developer Brian Dror, an Orthodox Jew in Fairfax – La Brea, was rocking and rolling. He ran in the David Rubin crowd. He put his house in a special trust in the late 1990s. Then he went bankrupt in circa 2008 and creditors were not able to get his home. There was a big pharmacist in the Los Angeles Orthodox community who was arrested in 2011 and Brian Dror put up his home for her bail.

Chaim Amalek writes:

When Moshiach comes, all the goyim we owed money to will bankrupt themselves for the honor of cancelling that debt and repaying double it to us. Just so that they might boast to the goyim they know, “I gave money to a Jew.”

Posted in bankruptcy, Orthodoxy | Comments Off

Because Portland Is White

This Washington Post articles fails to mention that Portland has the highest percentage of white people of any American city. That’s the only way it can sustain all these cool quirky collaborative ventures. Imagine public vegetable gardens in the downtown of a city filled with blacks? Imagine a tool sharing economy? A bike sharing economy in Detroit? It would not work.

America’s new sharing economy will only work as long as it remains the overwhelming province of whites and asians. If blacks begin using Uber and AirBNB in high numbers, the sharing economy will go to hell.

The Washington Post reports: “Of all the Very Portland things that exist in Portland, there is a plot of land next to City Hall, right outside the building’s front portico, where the city is growing its own Swiss chard.”

How much respect would downtown black youth give a Swiss chard garden?

America was a country of neighborliness when it was 90% white (the 1950s and earlier).

There’s not a whisper about race in this Washington Post story. I guess it is too obvious and too boring of an angle.

In another article, the Post writes: “Racial discrimination in housing wasn’t merely commonplace in the 1940s and ’50s; it was government policy. The Federal Housing Administration helped finance the construction of many suburban places like Levittown on the condition that they exclude blacks. And it underwrote mortgages to white families there with the expectation that their property values would only hold if blacks did not move in.”

Now we know better of course about how much the presence of blacks enhances property values and that kindly neighborly feeling.

Jason Richwine writes about Harvard Political Scientist Robert Putnam‘s finding that racial diversity, in particular the presence of blacks and latinos, is inversely proportionate to a neighborhood’s social capital:

Putnam walked us through how he came to his conclusion. At first, it was just a simple correlation. Looking at his list of the most trusting places, Putnam found whole states such as New Hampshire and Montana, rural areas in West Virginia and East Tennessee, and cities such as Bismarck, North Dakota and Fremont, Michigan. Among the least trusting places were the cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Houston. The most trusting places tended to be homogenously white, while the least trusting places were highly diverse.

Putnam told us he had been fairly certain the correlation would go away once other factors were taken into account. But it didn’t. He entered a long list of control variables into regression analyses that predict elements of social capital such as neighborly trust and civic participation. Many factors—especially younger age, less education, and higher poverty and crime rates—seem to damage community relations. But none of these factors could explain the robust, negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social capital. Sounding almost defeated, Putnam told us that ethnic diversity is not merely correlated with certain community problems—it causes them.

After finishing his presentation of the data, Putnam began a class discussion. He asked us whether we thought that all relevant scientific findings, no matter how disagreeable, deserve a public airing. Perhaps he was just trying to get us to think about difficult issues, but Putnam seemed genuinely conflicted himself. His concerns were rooted, understandably, in his personal politics. A man of the Left, he told us that he was deeply worried about being seen as advocating some form of “ethnic cleansing,” or being associated with the far Right in general.

From Robert Putnam’s Wikipedia entry:

In recent years, Putnam has been engaged in a comprehensive study of the relationship between trust within communities and their ethnic diversity. His conclusion based on over 40 cases and 30 000 people within the United States is that, other things being equal, more diversity in a community is associated with less trust both between and within ethnic groups. Although limited to American data, it puts into question both the contact hypothesis and conflict theory in inter-ethnic relations. According to conflict theory, distrust between the ethnic groups will rise with diversity, but not within a group. In contrast, contact theory proposes that distrust will decline as members of different ethnic groups get to know and interact with each other. Putnam describes people of all races, sex, socioeconomic statuses, and ages as “hunkering down,” avoiding engagement with their local community—both among different ethnic groups and within their own ethnic group. Even when controlling for income inequality and crime rates, two factors which conflict theory states should be the prime causal factors in declining inter-ethnic group trust, more diversity is still associated with less communal trust.

Lowered trust in areas with high diversity is also associated with:

Lower confidence in local government, local leaders and the local news media.
Lower political efficacy – that is, confidence in one’s own influence.
Lower frequency of registering to vote, but more interest and knowledge about politics and more participation in protest marches and social reform groups.
Higher political advocacy, but lower expectations that it will bring about a desirable result.
Less expectation that others will cooperate to solve dilemmas of collective action (e.g., voluntary conservation to ease a water or energy shortage).
Less likelihood of working on a community project.
Less likelihood of giving to charity or volunteering.
Fewer close friends and confidants.
Less happiness and lower perceived quality of life.
More time spent watching television and more agreement that “television is my most important form of entertainment”.
Putnam published his data set from this study in 2001[4][5] and subsequently published the full paper in 2007.[6]

Putnam has been criticized for the lag between his initial study and his publication of his article. In 2006, Putnam was quoted in the Financial Times as saying he had delayed publishing the article until he could “develop proposals to compensate for the negative effects of diversity” (quote from John Lloyd of Financial Times).[7] In 2007, writing in City Journal, John Leo questioned whether this suppression of publication was ethical behavior for a scholar, noting that “Academics aren’t supposed to withhold negative data until they can suggest antidotes to their findings.”[8] On the other hand, Putnam did release the data in 2001 and publicized this fact.[9] The proposals that the paper contains are located in a section called “Becoming Comfortable with Diversity” at the end of his article. This section has been criticized for lacking the rigor of the preceding sections. According to Ilana Mercer “Putnam concludes the gloomy facts with a stern pep talk”.[10]

In 2007 he briefly met Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi to discuss the role of civil society in the Libyan political context.

Posted in Blacks, Portland, Whites | Comments Off