The most noise from those with the least evidence

Two pieces of information which I have not seen widely reported. 1 - Things regarded as micro-aggressions by postmodern intersectionalists are not seen as insulting by an overwhelming majority of Americans, including an overwhelming majority of those deemed by postmodernists as having been insulted. 2 - The great majority of Americans (75%) report never having experienced discrimination and only 2-5% (depending on race) report frequently experiencing discrimination.

That is not the picture one would glean from the writings of those steeped in the ideologies of postmodernism, critical theory, intersectionality, and multiculturalism.

From Who Is Competent to Decide What Offends? by Conor Friedersdor.

In pursuit of the laudable aim of making students more conscientious of their communication, university administrators have have let their native ideology of postmodernism, critical theory, intersectionality and multiculturalism lead them astray, leaving their students more ignorant than informed.

Consider a widely circulated educational sheet, derived from an academic text, that seems to have originated in the UC system before being circulated at UC Santa Cruz, the University of Minnesota, the University of Wisconsin, the court system of Philadelphia, and beyond. It lists what it calls examples of “racial microaggressions” that “communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons.”

The following statements are included:

“You speak good English.”
“When I look at you I don’t see color.”
“America is a melting pot.”
“America is the land of opportunity.”
“Everyone can succeed in this society if they work hard enough.”

The UCLA professor Eugene Volokh once criticized this microaggressions sheet for going beyond “evenhandedly trying to prevent insult” to actively stigmatizing contested viewpoints, an inappropriate measure for administrators at a public university. I shared that objection at the time, but recently came upon another as powerful.

The Cato/YouGov survey on free speech and tolerance that I reported on last week included questions about whether folks find the same sentiments expressed above offensive.

Among the results?

Telling a recent immigrant, “you speak good English” was deemed “not offensive” by 77 percent of Latinos; saying “I don’t notice people’s race” was deemed “not offensive” by 71 percent of African Americans and 80 percent of Latinos; saying “America is a melting pot” was deemed not offensive by 77 percent of African Americans and 70 percent of Latinos; saying “America is the land of opportunity” was deemed “not offensive” by 93 percent of African Americans and 89 percent of Latinos; and saying “everyone can succeed in this society if they work hard enough” was deemed “not offensive” by 89 percent of Latinos and 77 percent of African Americans.

Public-opinion data cannot tell us whether a given statement is wrongheaded; and if campus progressives want to marshal substantive reasons for why any of the above statements should be eschewed, they ought to be free to articulate those arguments, and should receive a fair hearing by people who engage them on the merits. At times, I’m sure I’d agree with their analysis rather than the culture at large. I’m persuaded, for example, that “unauthorized immigrant” is the best locution.

But the literature was not circulated as the perspective of campus progressives on what should not be said; it was circulated as if it represented what offends and demeans people of color, even though huge majorities of African Americans and Latinos say, when actually consulted, that those very same statements are “not offensive.” (I have not yet found comparable survey data on the opinions of Asian Americans.)

The effect was to misinform any young people who accepted its assertions in two ways: they would have left college falsely confident that they understand what others find offensive and demeaning; and falsely perceiving folks who use the aforementioned phrases as offending others—willfully or through discreditable ignorance of widely held norms—even as those alleged “micro-aggressors,” who perhaps belong to a socioeconomic class less likely to attend college, saw themselves as being affirmatively friendly and inoffensive, and turn out to have a better grasp on what others think.

You don't have to be especially caustic to characterize universities as attempting to indoctrinate their students into ignorance.

The second piece I have seen once but not reported elsewhere is from The prevalence of discrimination across racial groups in contemporary America: Results from a nationally representative sample of adults by Brian B. Boutwell, et al.

They find, based on a survey of nearly 15,000 people, that only 25% of the circa 15,000 respondents report ever experiencing discrimination. Interestingly, all groups reported having experienced discrimination - Whites (24%), Blacks (32%), Hispanics (27%), Native Americans (27%), Asians (19%), Mixed Race (27%). The range of Americans ever having experienced discrimination is 19-32% depending on race.

The even better news is that only small percentages report frequent discrimination. Whites (4%), Blacks (5%), Hispanics (5%), Native Americans (5%), Asians (2%), Mixed Race (4%). The range of Americans often experiencing discrimination is 2-5% depending on race. That is a pretty tight range.

It is only one study but it is a large one and robust. Its design was established in advance, it is longitudinal over three decades, and it's population base was by design nationally representative.