It's funny how accusations of racism always make me want to look at statistics. After the Church Ladies over at TPM predictably called Steve Sailer a racist--and thus conveniently passed over his insights--I felt like looking at racial stats. I'll grow tired of posting hatefacts the day the hysteria ceases. When hell freezes over, in other words.
The General Social Survey asked 2,069 respondents how often they looked after a person's plant or a pet in the past year. The graph shows that whites help out much more often. Sixty-six percent of blacks and 54 percent of "others" never did it, compared to only 36 percent of whites. Fifty-nine percent of Mex-Ams never did it (graph not shown).
Of course, the Big Bad White Man made them unneighborly.
Variables: RACE, ETHNIC, HELPAWAY
Big surprise.
ReplyDeleteAnnoying little jew boy Aaron Swartz takes a snarky cheap shot at Steve Sailer.
Hmm, maybe I should pick on Jewish Americans then. Forty-eight percent of them didn't help.
ReplyDeleteInteresting analysis.
ReplyDeleteWould you be interested to try it with religiousness?
The prediction from other studies would be that more religiousness correlates with greater 'neighborliness'.
It might even be possible to look at denominations (probably Mormons would top that chart).
Could it be taht whites have higher rates of pet/plant ownership that other minorities? So then there would be fewer pets/plants for someone else to look after. That would probably be the simplest explanation.
ReplyDeleteAlternative explanations:
ReplyDelete1) Reduced pet/plant ownership among NAMs
2) Reduced out-of-town travel among NAMs
3) People don't trust their NAM neighbors to take care of their stuff whil they're out of town
Yeah, that seems like a very weak proxy for "neighborliness." For example, until very recently, Jews were less likely to own pets. I don't know about blacks and Latinos. It also could be that blacks and Latinos travel less or bring their pets along more or generally have someone staying home, etc.
ReplyDelete