…that the white girls of privilege won’t be able to eliminate their little snowflakes…

The white girls of privilege have always been able to fly off to Switzerland for a little R&R and D&C over Spring Break.

This argument would have much in common with that found in the bestselling book Freakonomics, which used crime statistics to argue that abortion filled a communal need by casting out the “weak” to ensure the “strong” survive, with a coldly calculating description of ethnic cleansing.

The chapter in “Freakonomics” referenced by Ben Domenech is called “Where have all the Criminals Gone?” It explores potential reasons why the crime rate dropped to 1940 levels during the early ’90’s, after alarmists had earlier predicted that crime rates would mount to a virtual “bloodbath” during that period. It compares the true economic effects of various popular theories for this decline–including: innovative policing strategies, increased reliance on prisons, changes in drug markets, aging of the population, tougher gun control laws, strong economy, increased numberr of police, and other methods–such as capital punishment, concealed weapons laws, gun buybacks, etc.

“Before Roe v. Wade, it was predominantly the daughters of middle- or upper-class families who could arrange and afford a safe illegal abortion. Now, instead of an illegal procedure that might cost $500, any woman could easily obtain an abortion, often for less than $100.
What sort of woman was most likely to take advantage of Roe v. Wade? Very often she was unmarried or in her teens or poor, and sometimes all three. What sort of future might her children have had? One study has shown that the typical child who went unborn would have been 50% more likely than average to live in poverty; he would have been 60% more likely to grow up with just one parent. These 2 factors–childhood poverty and a single-parent household–are among the strongest predictors that a child will have a criminal future. Growing up in a single-parent home roughly doubles a child’s propensity to commit crime. So does having a teenage mother. Another study has shown that low maternal education is the single most powerful factor leading to criminal activity.
In other words, the very factors that drove millions of American women to have an abortion also seemed to predict that their children, had they been born, would have led unhappy and possibly criminal lives.
. . .
In the early 1990’s just as the first cohort of children born after Roe v. Wade was hitting its late teen years–the years during which young men enter their criminal prime–the rate of crime began to fall. What this cohort was missing, of course, were the children who stood the greatest chance of becoming criminals. And the crime rate continued to fall as as an entire generation came of age minus the children whos mothers had not wanted to bring a child into the world. Legalized abortion led to less unwantedness; unwantedness leads to high crime; legalized abortion, therefore, led to less crime.
This theory is bound to provoka a viariety of reactions, ranging from disbelief to revulsion, and a variety of objections, ranging from the quotidian to the moral. The likeliest first objection is the most straightforward one: is the theory true? Perhaps abortion and crime are merely correlated and not causal.
. . .
One way to test the net effect of abortion on crime would be to measure crime data in the five states where abortion was made legal before the Supreme Court extended abortion rates to the rest of the country. In New York, California, Washington, Alaska and Hawaii . . . crime beg[a]n to fall earlier than the other 45 states and the District of Columbia. . . .

But what if thos early legalizers simply got lucky? . . .
One factor to look for [to establish the abortion-crime link] would be a correlation between each state’s abortion rate and its crime rate. Sure enough, the states with the highest abortion rates in the 1970’s experienced the lowest drop in crime in the 1990’s, while the states with the lowest abortion rates experienced smaller crime drops.

From “Freakonomics” by Levitt & Dubner, pp.138-141 (2005).

Notice that there is no mention of race or ethnicity in this argument.

…that the white girls of privilege won’t be able to eliminate their little snowflakes…

I can assure you that the white girls of privilege will most definitely find a way to “eliminate their little snowflakes.” Some will go to a state where abortion remains legal. Others will find a compassionate doctor in their small town or the nearest larger community.

Trust me that this went on all over the country, even during the ’40s, ’50s, and ’60s. For every girl who “visited out of town” for 6 months, there was one who managed an abortion.

The math works out well for them: keep initiating wars against brown people all over the world, send our brown people and poor white kids to fight them, outlaw abortion so that the white girls of privilege won’t be able to eliminate their little snowflakes, and, eventually, voila! a lily white America purged of all those illegal immigrants, a church on every corner, and good old repressed white people in every seat of every pew.

link

and apparently, they’ve put down the paste long enough to promise a big throwdown with dfh’s

link

Mornin’ All

Even though neither of the Two said or meant exactly what they are implied to have said or to have said or meant.

Prolly it is too conceptual for the dittohead contingent.