Main Edition
US
FR
Ramaswamy doesn't want to blend in (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
Crammed together on a crowded stage during the first Republican debate of 2023, two figures stood out: 38-year-old Vivek Ganapathy Ramaswamy, a biotech millionaire with a Harvard pedigree, and 51-year-old Nimrata Haley (née Randhawa), an accountant, former governor of South Carolina and ambassador to the United Nations.
Like 58-year-old Kamala Devi Harris, America’s Vice President, Ramaswamy and Haley are in the 1% of the US population that is Indian American. Despite their shared heritage, all three grew up in different Americas — though in each, Indians were rare, exotic and little understood. Harris, born at the end of 1964, was among the first members of Generation X, while Haley is solidly in the middle of that cohort. Ramaswamy, as a geriatric millennial, is firmly a child of the Eighties and Nineties.
For Harris’s generation, the dominant image of India in the American imagination centred around gurus such as Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, whose association with The Beatles brought them to public prominence. In its most benign manifestation, India meant mysticism and spirituality, though sometimes this would transmute into cult-like communities around charismatic and exploitative figures who drugged their followers and inspired anxious newspaper headlines.
Seven years later, during Haley’s childhood, India had become a byword for overpopulation and global environmental catastrophe. The Western view was summed up in Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb (1969), in which he described a night in Delhi that “seemed alive with people. People eating, people washing, people sleeping. People visiting, arguing, and screaming. People thrusting their hands through the taxi window, begging… People, people, people, people”. By the late Eighties and Nineties, however, when Ramaswamy was growing up, this view of India and Indians had become less hostile: the most prominent Indian American was Apu Nahasapeemapetilon from The Simpsons.
Largely as a result of their different childhoods, these three politicians responded to being outsiders, aliens despite being born in America, in disparate ways. Harris, the product of Sixties liberal idealism, has never denied her Tamil Brahmin mother’s identity; she was, after all, raised by an Indian woman after her parents’ divorce. But Harris’s attendance at the historically black Howard University and her Baptist religion points to the fact that she has chosen to align more closely with her African-American roots. Though she is both a black American and an Asian American, it is widely accepted that Joe Biden selected her because of her identity as the former.
Meanwhile, Haley, who grew up in the recently desegregated South, has talked about her lack of a place in a biracial world; as a young girl, she was disqualified from a beauty pageant because she was neither black nor white. Raised a Sikh by Punjabi Indian parents, Haley has never publicly distanced herself from her Indian heritage, but her conversion to Methodist Christianity, her decision to assume her husband’s Anglicised surname, and her somewhat racially ambiguous appearance have all furthered the perception that she is a model of smooth assimilation.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe other interesting thing about Ramaswamy is how he left the biotech company he founded. The story is in his first book. He was basically pushed out (and, in more or less polite terms, called a racist) because, as CEO, he refused to implement DEI ideology in his company, or otherwise allow the politicization of his company. In his view, the company’s sole goal was to develop successful drugs and make money. For that, the board ousted him.
The aspect of Ramaswamy’s ethnicity the author doesn’t touch on is that, as an Indian American, he is considered by the left to be “white adjacent”. In other words he’s tainted by privilege. That won’t hurt him in Republican circles because they don’t buy into critical race ideology, but I’m sure it stands against him in broader society. I respect his wholehearted embrace of his race and cultural roots. Harris plays the race game to the hilt and identifies as black. Haley went in the other direction and Anglicized herself so far as possible. They both strike me as phony.
I would like to see Ramaswamy as either president or vice-president (and as vice-president he could easily end up as president if Trump does jail time). Washington DC is ossified. The current ruling generation has outstayed its turn at the wheel. It’s time for a new generation in tune with the challenges of the 21st century.
As I understand it, Trump can become Us President while in jail and can then pardon himself.. hence, vice president VR would not become President until Trump impeached or dies etc.
The interesting twist is he could only pardon himself in relation to federal charges. The Georgia indictment, being state level, would still stand.
Not if that case is moved to federal court —
Goody, goody.
Not if that case is moved to federal court —
Goody, goody.
Not for state offenses, Georgia
Ah but Trump could die naturally or be assassinated
Oh please.
Oh please.
Trump could not pardon himself of State crimes, now in play in New York and Georgia. Real question if a state could claim jurisdiction over a sitting President, though.
The interesting twist is he could only pardon himself in relation to federal charges. The Georgia indictment, being state level, would still stand.
Not for state offenses, Georgia
Ah but Trump could die naturally or be assassinated
Trump could not pardon himself of State crimes, now in play in New York and Georgia. Real question if a state could claim jurisdiction over a sitting President, though.
Haley isn’t phony. I don’t think she is any moreor less assimilated than Vivek or Harris, who has to be phony to succeed in her circles.
You see Haley as phoney because she has aspired to become “American”? Do you feel the same about Irish, Italian, Polish or any other previous immigrant groups who abandoned their “old country” culture and language in favor of becoming culturaly American?
I’m told he believes climate change is a hoax.
Because it IS.
Because it IS.
That’s really interesting about Ramaswamy. I am a big fan of de Santis, but knowing that, I feel if the Republicans win, there is more hope for the West. Tbh while I don’t see Trump as Satan incarnate and have come to respect some of the things he did in power, for the sake of the world, I really wish he would retire and leave the field to the young men. Assuming de Santis and Ramaswamy could work together (and I believe they could) this would be a tremendously powerful forward-looking combination.
As I understand it, Trump can become Us President while in jail and can then pardon himself.. hence, vice president VR would not become President until Trump impeached or dies etc.
Haley isn’t phony. I don’t think she is any moreor less assimilated than Vivek or Harris, who has to be phony to succeed in her circles.
You see Haley as phoney because she has aspired to become “American”? Do you feel the same about Irish, Italian, Polish or any other previous immigrant groups who abandoned their “old country” culture and language in favor of becoming culturaly American?
I’m told he believes climate change is a hoax.
That’s really interesting about Ramaswamy. I am a big fan of de Santis, but knowing that, I feel if the Republicans win, there is more hope for the West. Tbh while I don’t see Trump as Satan incarnate and have come to respect some of the things he did in power, for the sake of the world, I really wish he would retire and leave the field to the young men. Assuming de Santis and Ramaswamy could work together (and I believe they could) this would be a tremendously powerful forward-looking combination.
The other interesting thing about Ramaswamy is how he left the biotech company he founded. The story is in his first book. He was basically pushed out (and, in more or less polite terms, called a racist) because, as CEO, he refused to implement DEI ideology in his company, or otherwise allow the politicization of his company. In his view, the company’s sole goal was to develop successful drugs and make money. For that, the board ousted him.
The aspect of Ramaswamy’s ethnicity the author doesn’t touch on is that, as an Indian American, he is considered by the left to be “white adjacent”. In other words he’s tainted by privilege. That won’t hurt him in Republican circles because they don’t buy into critical race ideology, but I’m sure it stands against him in broader society. I respect his wholehearted embrace of his race and cultural roots. Harris plays the race game to the hilt and identifies as black. Haley went in the other direction and Anglicized herself so far as possible. They both strike me as phony.
I would like to see Ramaswamy as either president or vice-president (and as vice-president he could easily end up as president if Trump does jail time). Washington DC is ossified. The current ruling generation has outstayed its turn at the wheel. It’s time for a new generation in tune with the challenges of the 21st century.
So, Ramaswamy, Harris, Pichai, and Nadella are all Brahmins.
My judgement is that Brahmins and Jews have been literate since whenever. This gives them an unearned privilege which ought to make them targets of our lefty wokey friends who, as we know, are the Allies of the Oppressed Peoples against the White (and White-adjacent) Oppressors.
But, my feeling is that our lefty wokey friends are not really smart enough to get any of this. All they know is to beat up white crackers and indict Trump. Bless their hearts.
Oh yeah, the celebration of Harris as an oppressed black woman was enough to make you vomit.
My vomiting reflex was incited more by her cackling, pointless laughter.
My vomiting reflex was incited more by her cackling, pointless laughter.
In the 1930s, as the British Empire devolved some powers to local elected parliaments in India, the assembly in the Madras Presidency was dominated by a Tamil nationalist party, the Justice Party (later to morph into the DMK). This party, populated by non Brahmins, was able to pass legislation chipping away at Brahmin privileges (earned by millennia of literacy). In particular the Justice Party restricted Brahmin dominance in the civil service (under British masters) and established limited quotas for Brahmins in higher education. Some Tamil Brahmins were forced to send their children out of India to go to university. The most popular choice of destination was the USA.
There are few powerful Indian Americans of Dalit or even Sudra background.
Actually, Justice Party and later variations were led by very rich people of landholding castes, not Dalits. In fact, the direct oppressors of Dalits were these landlord types of Justice Party, who conveniently blamed brahmins for oppressions in Hindu society. For Dravidian movement in power in the south for 60 years, still keep scapegoating brahmins with very Nazi like rhetoric
Indeed. But, specifically, not Brahmins. And, of course, Dravidians (language group) were anti the standardised Hindi mandate.
Nazi-like rhetoric? Hard to see Brahmins in the role of untermenschen.
Wow, nice try there, my man. Yep, it was the middling castes that were “directly oppressing” the Dalits, that is because the caste system is designed that way. The Brahmins were the play makers/strategists and the kshatriya and kshatriya adjacent class were the guys who were tasked with the bloody deeds, remember? On in other words, you are now scapegoating the middling castes who by design were in direct contact with the Dalits for the excesses of the caste system over millennia, while you reaped its benefits at the top without getting your hands dirty. The middling castes of the Justice Party, the “direct oppressors”, wised up to this scheme and to get their “fair” shake.
Nick, the system is very like the ‘identity’ racket that’s being built in the ‘West’. India is well ahead of ‘us’ in recognising the cynicism of these systems (millennia longer experience).
A few years ago the phrase ‘creamy layer’ was used to describe how the political machers of each ‘backward’ group enjoyed the fruits of intended redistribution.
The dramatic tell was the sight of Mayawati, the BSP head (BSP the Dalit party in the North) being garlanded at a party rally. The garlands were not made of flowers. The were long trailing tresses of high denomination rupee notes.
Yikes!
Nick, the system is very like the ‘identity’ racket that’s being built in the ‘West’. India is well ahead of ‘us’ in recognising the cynicism of these systems (millennia longer experience).
A few years ago the phrase ‘creamy layer’ was used to describe how the political machers of each ‘backward’ group enjoyed the fruits of intended redistribution.
The dramatic tell was the sight of Mayawati, the BSP head (BSP the Dalit party in the North) being garlanded at a party rally. The garlands were not made of flowers. The were long trailing tresses of high denomination rupee notes.
Yikes!
Indeed. But, specifically, not Brahmins. And, of course, Dravidians (language group) were anti the standardised Hindi mandate.
Nazi-like rhetoric? Hard to see Brahmins in the role of untermenschen.
Wow, nice try there, my man. Yep, it was the middling castes that were “directly oppressing” the Dalits, that is because the caste system is designed that way. The Brahmins were the play makers/strategists and the kshatriya and kshatriya adjacent class were the guys who were tasked with the bloody deeds, remember? On in other words, you are now scapegoating the middling castes who by design were in direct contact with the Dalits for the excesses of the caste system over millennia, while you reaped its benefits at the top without getting your hands dirty. The middling castes of the Justice Party, the “direct oppressors”, wised up to this scheme and to get their “fair” shake.
British Colonial Administrators in Madras dealt with these Justice party leaders, made shrewd observations and were less than impressed by them. Edwin Montagu found these Justice party leaders were not from backward groups
And what might a forward group look like? Are we talking here about vanguards? Or are we still immersed in caste (identity in the modern ‘West’) obscurantism?
Backward groups? Forward groups? Are we talking ‘vanguard’ politics here? Or are we stuck in the old caste (identity in Western think) miasma?
And what might a forward group look like? Are we talking here about vanguards? Or are we still immersed in caste (identity in the modern ‘West’) obscurantism?
Backward groups? Forward groups? Are we talking ‘vanguard’ politics here? Or are we stuck in the old caste (identity in Western think) miasma?
The caste system wasn’t, as you seem to imply, meritocratic. Which probably explains the missing medical Dalits. Indian Americans are quite happy to use the race card when needed, and engage in white bashing when expedient.
I have never seen caste as meritocratic and I’m unsure where you read that (caste system as meritocratic) into my remarks.
I have never seen caste as meritocratic and I’m unsure where you read that (caste system as meritocratic) into my remarks.
Actually, Justice Party and later variations were led by very rich people of landholding castes, not Dalits. In fact, the direct oppressors of Dalits were these landlord types of Justice Party, who conveniently blamed brahmins for oppressions in Hindu society. For Dravidian movement in power in the south for 60 years, still keep scapegoating brahmins with very Nazi like rhetoric
British Colonial Administrators in Madras dealt with these Justice party leaders, made shrewd observations and were less than impressed by them. Edwin Montagu found these Justice party leaders were not from backward groups
The caste system wasn’t, as you seem to imply, meritocratic. Which probably explains the missing medical Dalits. Indian Americans are quite happy to use the race card when needed, and engage in white bashing when expedient.
Maybe your lefty, wokey friends more intelligent than to have viewpoints warped by a racially based view of matters?
If they (you?) were in fact intelligent they might distinguish between race-based and caste-based judgements.
Stop excusing an anti-semitic comment by hiding behind a parallel reference to Hindu caste system.
If you think that Chantrill’s comment is anti-semitic challenge him yourself. Don’t try smearing me because I think you’re dumb.
If you think that Chantrill’s comment is anti-semitic challenge him yourself. Don’t try smearing me because I think you’re dumb.
Stop excusing an anti-semitic comment by hiding behind a parallel reference to Hindu caste system.
If they (you?) were in fact intelligent they might distinguish between race-based and caste-based judgements.
It behoves us all to call out oppressors and predators irrespective of colour, creed or ethnicity.
When training 420 senior and middle managers in a large London based organisation I noted that the Subcontinentals were easily the smartest and, gratifyingly, the Irish came in 2nd with the English down the line.. though they clearly thought otherwise! Indeed, it was their sense of exceptionalism that was, in my opinion, their undoing.. it meant they didn’t try too hard.
Now we have Subcontinentals everywhere in England running the show, and I’m not surprised.
Oh yeah, the celebration of Harris as an oppressed black woman was enough to make you vomit.
In the 1930s, as the British Empire devolved some powers to local elected parliaments in India, the assembly in the Madras Presidency was dominated by a Tamil nationalist party, the Justice Party (later to morph into the DMK). This party, populated by non Brahmins, was able to pass legislation chipping away at Brahmin privileges (earned by millennia of literacy). In particular the Justice Party restricted Brahmin dominance in the civil service (under British masters) and established limited quotas for Brahmins in higher education. Some Tamil Brahmins were forced to send their children out of India to go to university. The most popular choice of destination was the USA.
There are few powerful Indian Americans of Dalit or even Sudra background.
Maybe your lefty, wokey friends more intelligent than to have viewpoints warped by a racially based view of matters?
It behoves us all to call out oppressors and predators irrespective of colour, creed or ethnicity.
When training 420 senior and middle managers in a large London based organisation I noted that the Subcontinentals were easily the smartest and, gratifyingly, the Irish came in 2nd with the English down the line.. though they clearly thought otherwise! Indeed, it was their sense of exceptionalism that was, in my opinion, their undoing.. it meant they didn’t try too hard.
Now we have Subcontinentals everywhere in England running the show, and I’m not surprised.
So, Ramaswamy, Harris, Pichai, and Nadella are all Brahmins.
My judgement is that Brahmins and Jews have been literate since whenever. This gives them an unearned privilege which ought to make them targets of our lefty wokey friends who, as we know, are the Allies of the Oppressed Peoples against the White (and White-adjacent) Oppressors.
But, my feeling is that our lefty wokey friends are not really smart enough to get any of this. All they know is to beat up white crackers and indict Trump. Bless their hearts.
There is no such thing as a common South Asian personality, cultural orientation, language, literature, ethnicity or anything else.
Indian immigration to the US has been highly selective and it is this that has determined the character of the Indian American community.
There is no such thing as a common South Asian personality, cultural orientation, language, literature, ethnicity or anything else.
Indian immigration to the US has been highly selective and it is this that has determined the character of the Indian American community.
The success of the Indian communities in both the US and UK is awkward for those who seek to attribute all disparities in outcomes to racism (whether overt, unconscious or systemic). It raises the inconvenient possibility that immigrant communities and ethnic minorities have agency and may have as large a role in determining their fates as the attitudes of the pre-existing population. Their own attitudes and aptitudes may even be as significant as the racism – however defined – whose continued (if reduced) existence is undeniable.
Put simply, the increasingly accepted view that all differences in group outcomes are attributable to “systemic racism” is not only BS but demonstrably so. It is more complicated.
The historical legacy of Jim Crow and slavery – as well as the continued side effects of discriminatory property lending and the deployment of undertrained and over militarised police forces – may mean that these issues are more deeply entrenched in the psychology and politics of both white and black communities in the US than elsewhere and consequently are harder to analyse.
The situation in the UK, however, is a little clearer. If one looks at the official data on the four largest communities of people of colour in the UK, one can observe different trajectories in terms of education and income. (Educational success is crucial in determining life chances.) Their political success stories reflect the same pattern.
1/ Indians. 3.1% of population. 57% gain degree vs. 31% in white community. 20% higher hourly earnings on average vs. white population . Rishi Sunak (Prime Minister), Suella Braverman (Home Secretary).
2/ West Africans. 2.5%. 58% gain degree. No good data on income. Kwasi Kwarteng (former Chancellor), Kemi Badenoch (Trade Minister and current favourite for next Tory leader).
3/ South Asian Muslims. 3.8%. 42% gain degree. 11% lower earnings. Humza Yousaf (First Minister of Scotland), Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London).
4/ Black – Caribbean. 1.0%. 34% of BC women but only 23% of BC men get degrees. 7% lower hourly earnings . David Lammy (Shadow Foreign Secretary), Baroness Scotland (former Attorney General).
Broadly speaking, the pattern is stark. There is no single BAME experience. The Indian community is flourishing by any yardstick. West Africans, who have mostly arrived in recent years, appear to be on the same flight path educationally if not yet in terms of income (though it is hard to get good data). South Asian Muslims have struggled somewhat – partly because they settled in industrial areas that went into decline – and the outcome is not yet clear but their educational performance has improved in recent years. Black Caribbeans – on these numbers as well as anecdotally – have faced significant difficulties. It is the longest standing and most prominent but also the smallest of the four groups.
If one goes back to the 1970s all four groups were equal victims of intense racism. I still remember vividly getting badly beaten up as a teenager just for walking down the street with an Indian friend. It is challenging to attribute the four different outcomes today to the levels of racism encountered then.
Instead, if one looks at educational outcomes – perhaps the most important determinant. – then the most obvious differentiating factors are
a) Attitudes to education – basically how middle class?
b) Prior experience of racism by previous generation – how cynical about schools?
c) Family structure – is there a father present?
On this basis, the Indians score best and the Caribbean community are most disadvantaged. (Though one needs to be cautious about generalisations since those from Trinidad are more like the Indians on these factors and have been disproportionately successful compared say to Jamaicans).
If, moreover, one takes an intersectional approach and drills down into the data then one discovers that it not the whole African-Caribbean community which is underperforming. The girls do fine. Even the boys do well up to the age of 12. And of the boys over 12, it is the boys brought up by poor single mothers in areas with strong gangs who are most likely to fall by the wayside. David Lammy, who was brought up by a single mother but has prospered, has spoken eloquently about the need to encourage greater involvement of fathers. One obvious policy response, amongst several, is to recruit more black male teachers to act as role models in the absence of fathers.
One can apply a similar style analysis to other aspects of the problem e.g. employment chances, sentencing by judges, etc etc. In each case there are practical measures designed to improve life chances for individuals and progress for entire communities which seem more likely to produce positive results than the current progressive approach.
None of this is to deny that racism exists today. Not only the above data but plenty of other stats support anecdotal evidence that e.g. the number of letters needed to secure a job interview varies by ethnicity etc etc. What it does suggest is that the racism has declined to the point it is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to progress for any group, that it is amenable to focussed practical policies and that the supposedly marginalised have much more agency than is often suggested.
Absent deliberate attempts to exacerbate interracial tensions, I think I would be an optimist. The success of the Indian community shows what is possible. Even the challenges facing the Black-Caribbean community are amenable to practical responses. Lastly, in the UK how one speaks is as important as how one looks. If in some American cities there are distinct dialects spoken by different communities, London has seen the emergence of MLE (Multicultural London English) as used by the youth of all races. As a measure of identity, it is progress, innit?
These tentative – and relatively optimistic – conclusions are clearly inconvenient if one is a radical progressive strategist seeking to mobilise a coalition of marginalised groups on the basis of a one dimensional theory . A more complicated analysis provide counter narratives – and suggests different policies – to their widely propagated story which focuses exclusively on “systemic racism” to explain outcomes and draws heavily on supposedly representative “lived experiences” (as interpreted through a progressive ideological lens). There is value in both individual experiences and statistics. Both should be used to understand problems.
If, on the other hand, one has an amiable liberal preference for all citizens getting a fair chance in life – or merely a prudent recognition that it is dangerous in a multi ethnic society for any ethnic minority to have legitimate reasons to feel oppressed – then they should be welcome.
How relevant is this analysis to the US? Possibly more than might be assumed. Evidently – quite apart from the history – educational outcomes and income differentials are more divergent in the US than UK. The median black household income in the US is 35% below average as compared to the 20% in the UK. On the other hand, in their time, the Irish, Italian, Jewish, East Asian and Mexican communities were as disadvantaged and excluded as the African-American community is today but yet each in turn was able to get access to the American Dream (with Latin Americans as the latest entrants).
Is there something which means that the African-Americans will forever remain an anomaly? or will they eventually benefit from similar dynamics? While it was clearly necessary for the Civil Rights campaign to focus on politics to achieve legal equality, I can’t help wondering if the continued emphasis on politics, law and regulation as the main engines of black progress is misplaced. The other groups of former second class citizens all rose through primarily educational and economic means.
Meanwhile the monomaniacal focus on “systemic racism” and the thought-crimes of whites seems misguided. If Upper East Side matrons wish to “do the work” and wallow in their own guilt at workshops organised by Robin DiAngelo, fine. But corporate DEI struggle sessions seem less likely to help than more practical measures to e..g. improve education for disadvantaged groups. It is noticeable that rich liberals seem keener to “stand with” with BLM than reform school district financing so that the poor – of any race – can get a decent education.
In fact some research suggests DEI training in particular is positively counter-productive. It is not impossible that this is considered acceptable by its designers. One should never forget that Critical Theory based approaches are not intended to solve practical problems but to divide society, amplify the discontents of the “marginalised” and mobilise them for identity politics or even, ultimately, for an “emancipatory moment”.
Perhaps Al Gore should be asked to produce a sequel called “An Inconvenient Truth II” addressing these issues.
P.S. This was originally intended to be a much shorter comment. Got carried away. Apologies.
You wasted everyone’s time with that nonsense to come up with “DEI and CRT are bad”?
You people really will swallow absolutely any garbage, won’t you?
I did not mention CRT which has no agreed definition. As for DEI training, it is of very mixed quality but, in aggregate, I think it is having negative effects.
My main point, anyway, was to argue that the different trajectories of the various immigrant groups in the UK undermines the view that all variations in outcomes can be blamed on systemic racism. It is more complicated. The Indian communities in both the US and UK illustrate the point.
Which “you people” are you attacking? Scots? Old fashioned liberals? All readers of UnHerd? All of these at once?
“As for DEI training, it is of very mixed quality but, in aggregate, I think it is having negative effects.”
Based on what? Something you saw on Tucker Carlson?
There are good quality critiques of DEI out there – you just have to go and find them. Alice Eagly at Northwestern Uni is a good and sensible place to start.
I don’t watch Tucker Carlson. Two bits of evidence 1) Yale does tests of unconscious bias. Scores increased in those who undertook DEI training 2) Apparently minority junior executives are finding it increasingly hard to attract mentors (who often important for those climbing institutional ladders) since the latter regard the risks of such relationships as now too high. Law of unintended consequences? Perhaps getting everyone walking on eggshells is not the optimal route to creating an inclusive environment.
“Apparently” isn’t a great way to start presenting your “evidence”, old boy. Makes it sound like you are just making it up as you go.
“You think..” this, “apparently…” that. Got any facts for us?
I am not sure you have quite caught the spirit of constructive debate. Random needling which – apparently – is your thing does not cut it. But each to his own. Whatever works for you.
I’m not sure that “the spirit of constructive debate” includes you completely making things up with literally zero evidence.
Do better, laddie!
I’m not sure that “the spirit of constructive debate” includes you completely making things up with literally zero evidence.
Do better, laddie!
I am not sure you have quite caught the spirit of constructive debate. Random needling which – apparently – is your thing does not cut it. But each to his own. Whatever works for you.
“Apparently” isn’t a great way to start presenting your “evidence”, old boy. Makes it sound like you are just making it up as you go.
“You think..” this, “apparently…” that. Got any facts for us?
There are good quality critiques of DEI out there – you just have to go and find them. Alice Eagly at Northwestern Uni is a good and sensible place to start.
I don’t watch Tucker Carlson. Two bits of evidence 1) Yale does tests of unconscious bias. Scores increased in those who undertook DEI training 2) Apparently minority junior executives are finding it increasingly hard to attract mentors (who often important for those climbing institutional ladders) since the latter regard the risks of such relationships as now too high. Law of unintended consequences? Perhaps getting everyone walking on eggshells is not the optimal route to creating an inclusive environment.
You mentioned Critical Theory in a post exclusively about race, sport.
Critical Theory is a broad field. CRT is one specific application mostly confined to legal analysis (unless you are a right wing propagandist painting with a broad brush).
Critical Theory is a broad field. CRT is one specific application mostly confined to legal analysis (unless you are a right wing propagandist painting with a broad brush).
Conservatives.
That’s you, sonny.
I think of myself as an old fashioned liberal. I live in Scotland where the choice is SNP, Labour or Liberal. The Conservatives are regarded as entirely discredited.
“The Conservatives are regarded as entirely discredited.”
Not just a phenomenon north of the border as upcoming general election results will show.
“The Conservatives are regarded as entirely discredited.”
Not just a phenomenon north of the border as upcoming general election results will show.
I think of myself as an old fashioned liberal. I live in Scotland where the choice is SNP, Labour or Liberal. The Conservatives are regarded as entirely discredited.
“As for DEI training, it is of very mixed quality but, in aggregate, I think it is having negative effects.”
Based on what? Something you saw on Tucker Carlson?
You mentioned Critical Theory in a post exclusively about race, sport.
Conservatives.
That’s you, sonny.
Another ‘you people’ dumby. Not Champagne, not even Crement, more like carbonated pear juice.
His breakdown of the racial success of most non white groups is very interesting and kind of proves that the divisions in Britain are not primarily race based but class based. I bet if we delved into the white statistics on university attendance then we would see stark differences between the upper middle classes and the working classes in forgotten towns, and broken suburbs.
I can see why a champagne socialist might want us to concentrate on race though, emphasis on the champagne part of your identity
I did not mention CRT which has no agreed definition. As for DEI training, it is of very mixed quality but, in aggregate, I think it is having negative effects.
My main point, anyway, was to argue that the different trajectories of the various immigrant groups in the UK undermines the view that all variations in outcomes can be blamed on systemic racism. It is more complicated. The Indian communities in both the US and UK illustrate the point.
Which “you people” are you attacking? Scots? Old fashioned liberals? All readers of UnHerd? All of these at once?
Another ‘you people’ dumby. Not Champagne, not even Crement, more like carbonated pear juice.
His breakdown of the racial success of most non white groups is very interesting and kind of proves that the divisions in Britain are not primarily race based but class based. I bet if we delved into the white statistics on university attendance then we would see stark differences between the upper middle classes and the working classes in forgotten towns, and broken suburbs.
I can see why a champagne socialist might want us to concentrate on race though, emphasis on the champagne part of your identity
Great comment. Thank you.
Refreshing to read something with a bit of nuance and complexity….and the odd fact.
Thanks for this comment Alex. Worth a whole post to itself.
No worries I didn’t read it it’s too long. it’s supposed to be a comment not a lecture.
That’s a better comment than 99% of the journalism about race in Britain.
Great comment. Glad you took the time to write it.
You wasted everyone’s time with that nonsense to come up with “DEI and CRT are bad”?
You people really will swallow absolutely any garbage, won’t you?
Great comment. Thank you.
Refreshing to read something with a bit of nuance and complexity….and the odd fact.
Thanks for this comment Alex. Worth a whole post to itself.
No worries I didn’t read it it’s too long. it’s supposed to be a comment not a lecture.
That’s a better comment than 99% of the journalism about race in Britain.
Great comment. Glad you took the time to write it.
The success of the Indian communities in both the US and UK is awkward for those who seek to attribute all disparities in outcomes to racism (whether overt, unconscious or systemic). It raises the inconvenient possibility that immigrant communities and ethnic minorities have agency and may have as large a role in determining their fates as the attitudes of the pre-existing population. Their own attitudes and aptitudes may even be as significant as the racism – however defined – whose continued (if reduced) existence is undeniable.
Put simply, the increasingly accepted view that all differences in group outcomes are attributable to “systemic racism” is not only BS but demonstrably so. It is more complicated.
The historical legacy of Jim Crow and slavery – as well as the continued side effects of discriminatory property lending and the deployment of undertrained and over militarised police forces – may mean that these issues are more deeply entrenched in the psychology and politics of both white and black communities in the US than elsewhere and consequently are harder to analyse.
The situation in the UK, however, is a little clearer. If one looks at the official data on the four largest communities of people of colour in the UK, one can observe different trajectories in terms of education and income. (Educational success is crucial in determining life chances.) Their political success stories reflect the same pattern.
1/ Indians. 3.1% of population. 57% gain degree vs. 31% in white community. 20% higher hourly earnings on average vs. white population . Rishi Sunak (Prime Minister), Suella Braverman (Home Secretary).
2/ West Africans. 2.5%. 58% gain degree. No good data on income. Kwasi Kwarteng (former Chancellor), Kemi Badenoch (Trade Minister and current favourite for next Tory leader).
3/ South Asian Muslims. 3.8%. 42% gain degree. 11% lower earnings. Humza Yousaf (First Minister of Scotland), Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London).
4/ Black – Caribbean. 1.0%. 34% of BC women but only 23% of BC men get degrees. 7% lower hourly earnings . David Lammy (Shadow Foreign Secretary), Baroness Scotland (former Attorney General).
Broadly speaking, the pattern is stark. There is no single BAME experience. The Indian community is flourishing by any yardstick. West Africans, who have mostly arrived in recent years, appear to be on the same flight path educationally if not yet in terms of income (though it is hard to get good data). South Asian Muslims have struggled somewhat – partly because they settled in industrial areas that went into decline – and the outcome is not yet clear but their educational performance has improved in recent years. Black Caribbeans – on these numbers as well as anecdotally – have faced significant difficulties. It is the longest standing and most prominent but also the smallest of the four groups.
If one goes back to the 1970s all four groups were equal victims of intense racism. I still remember vividly getting badly beaten up as a teenager just for walking down the street with an Indian friend. It is challenging to attribute the four different outcomes today to the levels of racism encountered then.
Instead, if one looks at educational outcomes – perhaps the most important determinant. – then the most obvious differentiating factors are
a) Attitudes to education – basically how middle class?
b) Prior experience of racism by previous generation – how cynical about schools?
c) Family structure – is there a father present?
On this basis, the Indians score best and the Caribbean community are most disadvantaged. (Though one needs to be cautious about generalisations since those from Trinidad are more like the Indians on these factors and have been disproportionately successful compared say to Jamaicans).
If, moreover, one takes an intersectional approach and drills down into the data then one discovers that it not the whole African-Caribbean community which is underperforming. The girls do fine. Even the boys do well up to the age of 12. And of the boys over 12, it is the boys brought up by poor single mothers in areas with strong gangs who are most likely to fall by the wayside. David Lammy, who was brought up by a single mother but has prospered, has spoken eloquently about the need to encourage greater involvement of fathers. One obvious policy response, amongst several, is to recruit more black male teachers to act as role models in the absence of fathers.
One can apply a similar style analysis to other aspects of the problem e.g. employment chances, sentencing by judges, etc etc. In each case there are practical measures designed to improve life chances for individuals and progress for entire communities which seem more likely to produce positive results than the current progressive approach.
None of this is to deny that racism exists today. Not only the above data but plenty of other stats support anecdotal evidence that e.g. the number of letters needed to secure a job interview varies by ethnicity etc etc. What it does suggest is that the racism has declined to the point it is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to progress for any group, that it is amenable to focussed practical policies and that the supposedly marginalised have much more agency than is often suggested.
Absent deliberate attempts to exacerbate interracial tensions, I think I would be an optimist. The success of the Indian community shows what is possible. Even the challenges facing the Black-Caribbean community are amenable to practical responses. Lastly, in the UK how one speaks is as important as how one looks. If in some American cities there are distinct dialects spoken by different communities, London has seen the emergence of MLE (Multicultural London English) as used by the youth of all races. As a measure of identity, it is progress, innit?
These tentative – and relatively optimistic – conclusions are clearly inconvenient if one is a radical progressive strategist seeking to mobilise a coalition of marginalised groups on the basis of a one dimensional theory . A more complicated analysis provide counter narratives – and suggests different policies – to their widely propagated story which focuses exclusively on “systemic racism” to explain outcomes and draws heavily on supposedly representative “lived experiences” (as interpreted through a progressive ideological lens). There is value in both individual experiences and statistics. Both should be used to understand problems.
If, on the other hand, one has an amiable liberal preference for all citizens getting a fair chance in life – or merely a prudent recognition that it is dangerous in a multi ethnic society for any ethnic minority to have legitimate reasons to feel oppressed – then they should be welcome.
How relevant is this analysis to the US? Possibly more than might be assumed. Evidently – quite apart from the history – educational outcomes and income differentials are more divergent in the US than UK. The median black household income in the US is 35% below average as compared to the 20% in the UK. On the other hand, in their time, the Irish, Italian, Jewish, East Asian and Mexican communities were as disadvantaged and excluded as the African-American community is today but yet each in turn was able to get access to the American Dream (with Latin Americans as the latest entrants).
Is there something which means that the African-Americans will forever remain an anomaly? or will they eventually benefit from similar dynamics? While it was clearly necessary for the Civil Rights campaign to focus on politics to achieve legal equality, I can’t help wondering if the continued emphasis on politics, law and regulation as the main engines of black progress is misplaced. The other groups of former second class citizens all rose through primarily educational and economic means.
Meanwhile the monomaniacal focus on “systemic racism” and the thought-crimes of whites seems misguided. If Upper East Side matrons wish to “do the work” and wallow in their own guilt at workshops organised by Robin DiAngelo, fine. But corporate DEI struggle sessions seem less likely to help than more practical measures to e..g. improve education for disadvantaged groups. It is noticeable that rich liberals seem keener to “stand with” with BLM than reform school district financing so that the poor – of any race – can get a decent education.
In fact some research suggests DEI training in particular is positively counter-productive. It is not impossible that this is considered acceptable by its designers. One should never forget that Critical Theory based approaches are not intended to solve practical problems but to divide society, amplify the discontents of the “marginalised” and mobilise them for identity politics or even, ultimately, for an “emancipatory moment”.
Perhaps Al Gore should be asked to produce a sequel called “An Inconvenient Truth II” addressing these issues.
P.S. This was originally intended to be a much shorter comment. Got carried away. Apologies.
The high point of American democracy, Ramaswamy and Nikki Haley arguing over how much cash the US should give Israel. The best part is, a large number of clowns think this is viable in the long term LOL
How much ‘cash’ does the US currently give to Israel.I would have thought they were self-sufficient by now?
Wow.. not like you Charlie to be so ignorant on US aid to Israel! It’s all arms of course so it’s arguable whether the US is simply arming a proxy in the Middle East, Ukraine style..
Why do they need ever more arms?
Surely ‘we’ have done all the recent major fighting, Iraq War I, Iraq War II, Afghanistan, not to mention random terrorist attacks on London, Paris, Madrid, and New York etc.
Why do they need ever more arms?
Surely ‘we’ have done all the recent major fighting, Iraq War I, Iraq War II, Afghanistan, not to mention random terrorist attacks on London, Paris, Madrid, and New York etc.
Wow.. not like you Charlie to be so ignorant on US aid to Israel! It’s all arms of course so it’s arguable whether the US is simply arming a proxy in the Middle East, Ukraine style..
The US just gave 200 billion to Ukraine. 3 billion a year to Israel (to be spent on American weaponry ONLY) is peanuts, my friend.
Over how many years has the US been giving money to Israel though? The spending on Ukraine is recent. Moreover, how much is remitted privately to Israel from lobby groups in the US?
Over how many years has the US been giving money to Israel though? The spending on Ukraine is recent. Moreover, how much is remitted privately to Israel from lobby groups in the US?
How much ‘cash’ does the US currently give to Israel.I would have thought they were self-sufficient by now?
The US just gave 200 billion to Ukraine. 3 billion a year to Israel (to be spent on American weaponry ONLY) is peanuts, my friend.
The high point of American democracy, Ramaswamy and Nikki Haley arguing over how much cash the US should give Israel. The best part is, a large number of clowns think this is viable in the long term LOL
Go Vivek!!!
Viva! Have you seen his short Manifesto statement – on God, gender, capitalism etc? Every Tory should be sent it and asked – do you agree with every line? Many will not. And should be disbarred. We lack any vision. Oh for his energy and will!
Viva! Have you seen his short Manifesto statement – on God, gender, capitalism etc? Every Tory should be sent it and asked – do you agree with every line? Many will not. And should be disbarred. We lack any vision. Oh for his energy and will!
Go Vivek!!!
If any of them get in, they will at least be able to pronounce our premier’s name correctly. Biden hesitated and then took a punt with “Rashee Sanook”.
At least an improvement on Japan, where he was pronounced “Richee Snacku” !
At least an improvement on Japan, where he was pronounced “Richee Snacku” !
If any of them get in, they will at least be able to pronounce our premier’s name correctly. Biden hesitated and then took a punt with “Rashee Sanook”.
I was waiting for a comparison with the UK, where the Tory political elite now has at least three South Asian leaders, not at all as tokens but real power brokers.
The Tory elite are colour blind and non prejudiced: if someone is rich then they like it.
Unlike the Tory party membership who voted for Liz Truss rather than Rishi and would no doubt have rejected him again if they had been given the chance.
The white Republican vote won’t turn out for Vivek and I would be amazed if he got the nomination even without Trump being in the contest.
He would have more chance on the Moon, given India’s recent triumph.
Hey John Bull move out of the envy juices you stew in
Hey John Bull move out of the envy juices you stew in
You really think Truss won because she was white? I think the Tory.voter recognized Sunak’s u turn poses and blob ideas. The only thing his staff can find to say to sell him js that he works very hard.
Well she certainly didn’t win because she was the smartest most able media performer with a track record of consistency. The whole country knew she was a ‘dud’, even Bojo who wanted an incompetent to follow him so he could maybe return sooner. And yet the Tory members still voted for her. Does beg a question what else was going on at a subconscious level?
Well she certainly didn’t win because she was the smartest most able media performer with a track record of consistency. The whole country knew she was a ‘dud’, even Bojo who wanted an incompetent to follow him so he could maybe return sooner. And yet the Tory members still voted for her. Does beg a question what else was going on at a subconscious level?
You obviously don’t know any white Republicans.
Trump might opt for a ‘non politician’ like himself as running mate? It sure as hell won’t be Mike Pence this time!
He would have more chance on the Moon, given India’s recent triumph.
You really think Truss won because she was white? I think the Tory.voter recognized Sunak’s u turn poses and blob ideas. The only thing his staff can find to say to sell him js that he works very hard.
You obviously don’t know any white Republicans.
Trump might opt for a ‘non politician’ like himself as running mate? It sure as hell won’t be Mike Pence this time!
Indeed the Tory elite, like elites everywhere, are blind to everything except money and how to maximise its extraction from the 90% and support each other in the class war. Sometimes, like this issue, it is to their credit just like a broken clock is correct twice every 24 hours. Hitler was a dog lover..
Unlike the Tory party membership who voted for Liz Truss rather than Rishi and would no doubt have rejected him again if they had been given the chance.
The white Republican vote won’t turn out for Vivek and I would be amazed if he got the nomination even without Trump being in the contest.
Indeed the Tory elite, like elites everywhere, are blind to everything except money and how to maximise its extraction from the 90% and support each other in the class war. Sometimes, like this issue, it is to their credit just like a broken clock is correct twice every 24 hours. Hitler was a dog lover..
I can’t recall one decent, intelligent, visionary, UK Conservative politician of South Asian heritage, just unpleasant interlopers and chancers.
The Tory elite are colour blind and non prejudiced: if someone is rich then they like it.
I can’t recall one decent, intelligent, visionary, UK Conservative politician of South Asian heritage, just unpleasant interlopers and chancers.
I was waiting for a comparison with the UK, where the Tory political elite now has at least three South Asian leaders, not at all as tokens but real power brokers.
A very interesting analysis. I belong to a pre Americanised generation of Indians. Our upbringing was completely based on an imitation of the upper middle classes of Britain, so much so that in our public school modelled English speaking only schools, we hardly were taught our native languages properly.
It was a shock when one came to the UK as a student to be asked to pass a ” Test of English as a Foreign language”.. That is perhaps what set me to re- think about my roots, along with other perceptions..
The gap between Vivek Ramaswamy and Niki Haley is thus one of two India’s- one that of being sub- consciously in denial of it’s civilizational roots in order to gain acceptance and validation by the majority in Western nations. The other is in being proud of it and leveraging that identity to that of a more broadly mainstreamed political discourse.
I suspect there is an intriguing article for UnHerd on this topic. I remember my shock when an Indian friend – with a similar hybrid cultural background to yours as an Indian Old Etonian – announced in the 1990s that he was switching his support to the BJP. After he explained his thinking I began to sense some of the complexities you allude to but, like most British people, I doubt I have more than scratched the surface. Maybe you should write something longer.
Yes, I do live this conflict on a daily basis. You are also right in your assumptions. Paul Scott is one British writer who kind of got it right in his characterization of Hari Kumar in the Jewel in the Crown. ” Too English for the Indians, too Indian for the English”.
Being name- called often and even in 2023 as lacking ” manners” or writing poor English by some people here shows that even circa 2023 we orphans of Lord Macaulay actually belong nowhere…
Yes, I do live this conflict on a daily basis. You are also right in your assumptions. Paul Scott is one British writer who kind of got it right in his characterization of Hari Kumar in the Jewel in the Crown. ” Too English for the Indians, too Indian for the English”.
Being name- called often and even in 2023 as lacking ” manners” or writing poor English by some people here shows that even circa 2023 we orphans of Lord Macaulay actually belong nowhere…
I suspect there is an intriguing article for UnHerd on this topic. I remember my shock when an Indian friend – with a similar hybrid cultural background to yours as an Indian Old Etonian – announced in the 1990s that he was switching his support to the BJP. After he explained his thinking I began to sense some of the complexities you allude to but, like most British people, I doubt I have more than scratched the surface. Maybe you should write something longer.
A very interesting analysis. I belong to a pre Americanised generation of Indians. Our upbringing was completely based on an imitation of the upper middle classes of Britain, so much so that in our public school modelled English speaking only schools, we hardly were taught our native languages properly.
It was a shock when one came to the UK as a student to be asked to pass a ” Test of English as a Foreign language”.. That is perhaps what set me to re- think about my roots, along with other perceptions..
The gap between Vivek Ramaswamy and Niki Haley is thus one of two India’s- one that of being sub- consciously in denial of it’s civilizational roots in order to gain acceptance and validation by the majority in Western nations. The other is in being proud of it and leveraging that identity to that of a more broadly mainstreamed political discourse.
Vivek won’t get elected. He understands the climate change nonsense. Look at the crowd reaction when he mentioned it. American wants another stupid president.
Vivek won’t get elected. He understands the climate change nonsense. Look at the crowd reaction when he mentioned it. American wants another stupid president.
It’s odd to read an article in UnHerd about the welcome rise of Indian Americans like Vivek and Nikki, one which specifically ponders why people from such a background might be ‘on the political rise’ in the US, without it once glancing across the Atlantic. Not only to analogise with our own Prime Minister (though, you know, it’s interesting), but to consider (according to disposition) either what you might think of as the historical reasons for Anglo-Indian affinities, or (if you take a more Marxist view) the historical accident of them. Vivek is interesting in his own right, but if I were a cultural historical who wanted to explain the rise of South Asians in the anglosphere, I would find it impossible not to start with some of the really obvious history.
You might also consider India’s ancient history, ie the Indus Valley civilization which coincided with Britons dragging each other from cave to cave by the hair!
And what were the Irish up to Liam old chap? Not much I warrant.
It wasn’t enough to save them from being colonised by a few tens of thousands of Englishmen though, was it?
Mountjoy rolled the place over with slightly less than 20K.
Mountjoy rolled the place over with slightly less than 20K.
And what were the Irish up to Liam old chap? Not much I warrant.
It wasn’t enough to save them from being colonised by a few tens of thousands of Englishmen though, was it?
You might also consider India’s ancient history, ie the Indus Valley civilization which coincided with Britons dragging each other from cave to cave by the hair!
It’s odd to read an article in UnHerd about the welcome rise of Indian Americans like Vivek and Nikki, one which specifically ponders why people from such a background might be ‘on the political rise’ in the US, without it once glancing across the Atlantic. Not only to analogise with our own Prime Minister (though, you know, it’s interesting), but to consider (according to disposition) either what you might think of as the historical reasons for Anglo-Indian affinities, or (if you take a more Marxist view) the historical accident of them. Vivek is interesting in his own right, but if I were a cultural historical who wanted to explain the rise of South Asians in the anglosphere, I would find it impossible not to start with some of the really obvious history.
He’s doing sterling work as the voice of the, ahem, New Brics.
In fact, where Modi and Lula won’t go that far officially, he’s our only mass-mediatised voice standing against the neocon. Largely because he can afford to do so (in every sense).
I hope he and Robert Kennedy Jnr pair up effectively in the next 18 months. I think we’ll be back to the Minsk Accords anyway, but they could help speed up the process.
That combination would increase the IQ in the White House to levels never seen in recent history!
Not difficult when Joe (Ballina) Biden has an IQ of less than 75.
Not difficult when Joe (Ballina) Biden has an IQ of less than 75.
That combination would increase the IQ in the White House to levels never seen in recent history!
He’s doing sterling work as the voice of the, ahem, New Brics.
In fact, where Modi and Lula won’t go that far officially, he’s our only mass-mediatised voice standing against the neocon. Largely because he can afford to do so (in every sense).
I hope he and Robert Kennedy Jnr pair up effectively in the next 18 months. I think we’ll be back to the Minsk Accords anyway, but they could help speed up the process.
Do you think the ‘White Supremacists’ and the Evangelical Christians who are the core Republican vote would vote for this guy?
Since those cohorts were among the Americans who voted on the previous brown guy with a funny name, even if they all voted against Ramaswamy, they wouldn’t change the result.
Since those cohorts were among the Americans who voted on the previous brown guy with a funny name, even if they all voted against Ramaswamy, they wouldn’t change the result.
Do you think the ‘White Supremacists’ and the Evangelical Christians who are the core Republican vote would vote for this guy?
As an American and disenfranchised Democrat, I watched the debate with great interest, longing for any alternative to Biden, and I certainly cannot vote for Trump. I found Ramaswamy to be insufferable. Not only pompous in demeanor, but shallow in his answers – typical of his generation, he delivered sound bites and slogans instead of answers. Christie was right about him being Chat GPT.
Ramaswamy is also a firm denier of climate change as Hawaii burns and California suffers a hurricane and mudslides. And he claims federal agents may have caused 9/11. As a New Yorker, this is completely obscene and unacceptable.
On the other hand, Nikki Haley was very impressive – smart, sharp, experienced, knowledgeable, and most of all – reasonable! She held her own on a stage of arrogant men, and never waivered in her strength and positions. I saw a President in Haley.
Honestly, if Nikki Haley was a man, I think people would universally be concluding she won that debate. But in people’s minds she is automatically disqualified because she is a woman. As a woman, I can see that she shone in her blue suit amid a sea of red ties.
America needs a woman to get us out of the mess we are in, to rise above the fray of ego and unproductive bickering. Nikki Haley is the woman.
Agreeing with most of what you said, I disagree with the assumption that women are somehow superior creatures. When the suffragets were marching, many claimed that peace and principle would follow from their votes. Alas, no change. As for today, we’ve seen female leaders of every stripe. I agree with you about Haley, but only as a competent, articulate, sensible human.
Understand. We’ve just never had a woman President, and it would be a breath of fresh air and a change of direction at this point. And Haley seems the perfect fit for the job.
Hillary Clinton almost made it to the White House, and instead of fresh air would have dispersed repulsively bad breath.
Haha
Haha
Hillary Clinton almost made it to the White House, and instead of fresh air would have dispersed repulsively bad breath.
Understand. We’ve just never had a woman President, and it would be a breath of fresh air and a change of direction at this point. And Haley seems the perfect fit for the job.
Agreeing with most of what you said, I disagree with the assumption that women are somehow superior creatures. When the suffragets were marching, many claimed that peace and principle would follow from their votes. Alas, no change. As for today, we’ve seen female leaders of every stripe. I agree with you about Haley, but only as a competent, articulate, sensible human.
As an American and disenfranchised Democrat, I watched the debate with great interest, longing for any alternative to Biden, and I certainly cannot vote for Trump. I found Ramaswamy to be insufferable. Not only pompous in demeanor, but shallow in his answers – typical of his generation, he delivered sound bites and slogans instead of answers. Christie was right about him being Chat GPT.
Ramaswamy is also a firm denier of climate change as Hawaii burns and California suffers a hurricane and mudslides. And he claims federal agents may have caused 9/11. As a New Yorker, this is completely obscene and unacceptable.
On the other hand, Nikki Haley was very impressive – smart, sharp, experienced, knowledgeable, and most of all – reasonable! She held her own on a stage of arrogant men, and never waivered in her strength and positions. I saw a President in Haley.
Honestly, if Nikki Haley was a man, I think people would universally be concluding she won that debate. But in people’s minds she is automatically disqualified because she is a woman. As a woman, I can see that she shone in her blue suit amid a sea of red ties.
America needs a woman to get us out of the mess we are in, to rise above the fray of ego and unproductive bickering. Nikki Haley is the woman.
I suspect that Mr Ramaswamy’s campaign will be a repeat of Michael Bloomberg’s very expensive fiasco of 2020.
Off course for British observers who recall The Raj, many will have even less charitable thoughts, that are obviously unrepeatable on such a liberal platform as UnHerd.
However to give a hint : “If you see his lips moving……………
I am surprised to see such racial stereotypes on Unherd.
I am surprised to see such racial stereotypes on Unherd.
I suspect that Mr Ramaswamy’s campaign will be a repeat of Michael Bloomberg’s very expensive fiasco of 2020.
Off course for British observers who recall The Raj, many will have even less charitable thoughts, that are obviously unrepeatable on such a liberal platform as UnHerd.
However to give a hint : “If you see his lips moving……………
9-11 truther, Jan 6 denier. Climate change denier. Anti-woke, whatever that is supposed to mean today. Rants and raves at debates.
No surprise you guys love him. Unfortunately 95% of conservatives will just think that he had something to do with 9-11 and you should probably invade his country and take their oil.
Sadly he doesn’t have any, otherwise we might follow your very sound advice.
Oh, hey Racist Grandpa!
Oh, hey Racist Grandpa!
Sadly he doesn’t have any, otherwise we might follow your very sound advice.
9-11 truther, Jan 6 denier. Climate change denier. Anti-woke, whatever that is supposed to mean today. Rants and raves at debates.
No surprise you guys love him. Unfortunately 95% of conservatives will just think that he had something to do with 9-11 and you should probably invade his country and take their oil.
Interesting Article, esp bit about the possible cultural reasons that make some wealthy East Asian heritage better able to take on the ‘rough and tumble’ of adversarial politics.
Watched this guy for first time in the debate, and had looked at his background prior. Clearly considerable academic and business acumen. Crucially smart enough to know which ‘tiger’ to ride, at least to raise his profile and electoral chances. But clearly also a total cretin as he’s smart enough to know what a load of cobblers he was spouting.
Interesting Article, esp bit about the possible cultural reasons that make some wealthy East Asian heritage better able to take on the ‘rough and tumble’ of adversarial politics.
Watched this guy for first time in the debate, and had looked at his background prior. Clearly considerable academic and business acumen. Crucially smart enough to know which ‘tiger’ to ride, at least to raise his profile and electoral chances. But clearly also a total cretin as he’s smart enough to know what a load of cobblers he was spouting.
Sounds like another swivel-eyed loon, but no doubt has simply chosen right wing dogma to attract that voter base.
Unlike, of course, the ‘swivel-eyed loons’ of the Democrat tribe (AOC, Warren et al) who have simply chosen left wing dogma to attract that voter base.
Well that’s true, get’s an up vote from me!
Left wing dogma? LOL
What you label as “left-wing”, the rest of the world, as well as people significantly smarter than you, label as center-right policies.
The Democrats are hardly left-wing unless one is so far alt-right that literally anything that appears to oppose your political ideology, like facts and liberal ideas are all imagined to originate from your left-wing hellscape.
Thank you. You’ve made my point perfectly.
Thank you. You’ve made my point perfectly.
Well that’s true, get’s an up vote from me!
Left wing dogma? LOL
What you label as “left-wing”, the rest of the world, as well as people significantly smarter than you, label as center-right policies.
The Democrats are hardly left-wing unless one is so far alt-right that literally anything that appears to oppose your political ideology, like facts and liberal ideas are all imagined to originate from your left-wing hellscape.
Unlike, of course, the ‘swivel-eyed loons’ of the Democrat tribe (AOC, Warren et al) who have simply chosen left wing dogma to attract that voter base.
Sounds like another swivel-eyed loon, but no doubt has simply chosen right wing dogma to attract that voter base.
A horrible little man who wants to prevent younger people from voting by raising the voting age. Cheating in elections is a Republican thing but fortunately he will lose because he is both “ white adjacent” and unpalatable to core angry white Republican voters in places like Michigan and Ohio for obvious reasons.
Are progressives born petty and resentful or are these just traits that develop as a result of constant personal failure?
Whatever you say but if he is selected his origins will count against him and Biden will triumph again.
Assuming he still alive and compos mentis.
That shouldn’t really interfere. It didn’t last time.
That shouldn’t really interfere. It didn’t last time.
Whats the IQ gap between Vivek and Joe? 70 points. Republicans could reincarnate Lincoln and still lose because mindless drones like yourself obey your media masters every command.
Assuming he still alive and compos mentis.
Whats the IQ gap between Vivek and Joe? 70 points. Republicans could reincarnate Lincoln and still lose because mindless drones like yourself obey your media masters every command.
The answer is obvious when you consider the vast numbers of useless pretend-intellectuals infesting US universities, 98% of them ‘progressives’.
Whatever you say but if he is selected his origins will count against him and Biden will triumph again.
The answer is obvious when you consider the vast numbers of useless pretend-intellectuals infesting US universities, 98% of them ‘progressives’.
Are progressives born petty and resentful or are these just traits that develop as a result of constant personal failure?
A horrible little man who wants to prevent younger people from voting by raising the voting age. Cheating in elections is a Republican thing but fortunately he will lose because he is both “ white adjacent” and unpalatable to core angry white Republican voters in places like Michigan and Ohio for obvious reasons.