BlackLivesMatter, defending brutal criminal

A Black Northwestern U. sociology professor starts a scholarly paper in Scientific American:

One evening nine years ago 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was walking through a Florida neighborhood with candy and iced tea when a vigilante pursued him and ultimately shot him dead. The killing shocked me back to the summer of 1955, when as a six-year-old boy I heard that a teenager named Emmett Till had been lynched at Money, Miss., less than 30 miles from where I lived with my grandparents.

The similarities in the two assaults, almost six decades apart, were uncanny. ... And in July 2013, on learning about the acquittal of Martin’s killer, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi invented the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter, a rallying cry for numerous local struggles for racial justice that sprang up across the U.S.

No, this is delusional. Martin had a watermelon drink, not iced tea. A neighborhood watch man called 911, and reported Martin's suspicious behavior. Vigilantes do not call 911. Martin was only shot after he brutally attacked and beat the innocent watch man.

I post this because here is a Black scholar trying to find examples of racism to promote his Black Lives Matter agenda. His pathetic attempts only show that there are no examples.

To defend Martin is to say that Blacks have a right to smash your skull against the pavement repeatedly, and you may do nothing about it. To say Black Lives Matter is to say that we must tolerate Black thugs like Martin wander around your neighborhood committing violent crimes.

As I studied collective behavior theory, however, I became outraged by its denigration of participants in social movements as fickle and unstable, bereft of legitimate grievances and under the spell of agitators. ...

GEORGE FLOYD’S murder by a police officer in Minneapolis, Minn., on May 25, 2020, triggered the largest protests in U.S. history, including this one in New York City the following June. ...

But the killings of Black adults and children continued unabated—and with each atrocity the movement swelled. The last straw was the murder of George Floyd in May 2020 in Minneapolis, Minn., which provoked mass demonstrations in every U.S. state and in scores of countries.

His stupid essay is also bereft of legitimate grievances.

NY Times reports on another Black (Dominican) scholar:

Dan-el Padilla Peralta thinks classicists should knock ancient Greece and Rome off their pedestal — even if that means destroying their discipline. ...

Padilla, a leading historian of Rome who teaches at Princeton and was born in the Dominican Republic, was one of the panelists that day. For several years, he has been speaking openly about the harm caused by practitioners of classics in the two millenniums since antiquity: the classical justifications of slavery, race science, colonialism, Nazism and other 20th-century fascisms. Classics was a discipline around which the modern Western university grew, and Padilla believes that it has sown racism through the entirety of higher education. ...

They have shown that the concept of Western civilization emerged as a euphemism for “white civilization” in the writing of men like Lothrop Stoddard, a Klansman and eugenicist. Some classicists have come around to the idea that their discipline forms part of the scaffold of white supremacy — a traumatic process one described to me as “reverse red-pilling” — but they are also starting to see an opportunity in their position. Because classics played a role in constructing whiteness, they believed, perhaps the field also had a role to play in its dismantling. ...

“He’s on record as saying that he’s not sure the discipline deserves a future,” Denis Feeney, a Latinist at Princeton, told me. Padilla believes that classics is so entangled with white supremacy as to be inseparable from it. “Far from being extrinsic to the study of Greco-Roman antiquity,” he has written, “the production of whiteness turns on closer examination to reside in the very marrows of classics.”

So he is saying that destroying the White society will require destroying the historical understanding of how Western Civilization became great.

Update: A new paper in a high-status biology journal:

Our nationwide network of BME women faculty collectively argue that racial funding disparity by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) remains the most insidious barrier to success of Black faculty in our profession. We thus refocus attention on this critical barrier and suggest solutions on how it can be dismantled.

Main text
We are at a historic moment in time: a mainstream awakening to the pain that stems from racial injustice, with our scientific communities openly acknowledging that our practices promote racial inequity and disparity (Barber et al., 2020; Cell Editorial Team, 2020). ...

NIH must break its cycle of denial, which in the words of leading antiracism scholar Ibram X. Kendi, is “the heartbeat of racism.” NIH must acknowledge that racism exists in order to build the foundation of understanding needed to overcome it.

We ask NIH: are race and ethnicity not considered diversity? In the words of our colleague Dr. Manu Platt:
“Be careful with responding, because one answer is racist and the other is not” (Platt, 2020 ).
NIH must institute an “equity” policy or program for Black investigators ...

We ask: why is “diversity of the investigator team” not a scorable criterion in NIH grant review and priority for funding?
Be careful with responding, because one answer is racist and the other is not (Platt, 2020 ).
To foster innovative strategies, diversity must be woven into the fabric of everything that NIH does.

Yes, the published paper actually repeated the stupid text about "because one answer is racist". It also uses the obscure acronym BME in the first sentence, for biomedical engineering.

It would indeed be racist for NIH to score race and ethnicity in its funding decisions. The authors advocate that, and say it would be "racist" not to.

Of course there is no actual example of a Black scientist getting mistreated, or getting less funding than he deserves. All of the evidence indicates that Blacks are already getting preferential treatment, and extra funding.