Hey, if you want to continue to use a service that violates people’s rights (kinda like Jim Crow Laws, but for the digital age, and ideology instead of race), than that’s on you. Since you don’t think violating people’s rights on the internet isn’t a big enough deal to act, then, at least, at a minimum, take SOME sort of action, any sort of action, in the name of liberty and freedom; do SOMETHING if anything:
Continue reading
To help sift through all the BS and politicization of this situation, we will sift through the data and sources to help isolate the REAL experts and the REAL reliable numbers. That why when some nutjob trys to spit numbers to justify taking away your rights, you have better, more sound, ammunition, per-say.
But, first thing we need to get out of the way:
The Diplomat, a journalism site focused on events in Asia, published a mildly fair overview of the data situation in china, and at the end states “the world should not automatically embrace the new numbers coming from the country. With a cautious note about China’s statistical unreliability in mind, we should continue to closely observe…” [2] Even Brookings Institute, a reliable economic think-tank, doesn’t trust numbers coming out of China [1]. Even the unreliable and biased Time reported the unreliability of China’s data [5]. Then there is PBS, who takes a softer approach to criticizing the Communist Party of China, still provides ample facst as to why they can’t be trusted [7]. The Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo said during a CNBC interview [6], “incredibly frustrating” to work with the Chinese government to obtain data on the coronavirus, “which will ultimately be the solution to both getting the vaccine and attacking this risk.” And that is true. Then we have the “U.S. intelligence community” and their “classified report” claiming China’s numbers are fake. But, they are extremely hard to trust, period. But, Bloomberg then starts to go off on this political conspiracy theory about an “attempt to divert attention from surging deaths in the U.S. and other Western countries” and then makes the sadly biased comment “There was no way for serious data faking to occur in today’s China…” [9]. Notice they added the word “serious.” So they secretly admit there was some faking but too coward to openly say it; bias. Even the New York Times, as dishonest as they are, seems to support this CIA claim. [11]. And to expose unreliable reporting from outlets such as Bloomberg, Forbes reports: “Maybe our numbers aren’t entirely giving the full picture of the coronavirus“, China health officials said on Tuesday [March 31, 2020][10].
Now, with all these sources, some more reliable than others, we can paint a more complete picture of the reliability of the data coming out of China. And their data, given the totality of analysis and reporting; is unreliable.
Since we CAN determine that the numbers coming out of China are unreliable, does that make them unusable? Yes. If you incorporate skewed data into a formula, the result is skewed. If you add false information into a equation, the solution is incorrect. The same logic applies to using China’s numbers when determining the truth about COVID-19.
People will argue something like “but you can still get a general idea,” but can you? You aren’t even sure how accurate your “general idea” is when it is dependent on inaccurate information… Your “general idea” may be WAY off, but you wouldn’t know.
Welp, considering THEY are allowing China to pick the people who will investigate human rights violations says it all. That’s like putting Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin on the Human Rights Commission to help better the world… yet, that is exactly what the WHO did.
“On Jan. 19, the WHO told the world “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China.”
What they didn’t tell the world, but they knew all too well, is that China was engaged in a campaign of lies and cover-ups to hide the viral devastation their nation had unleashed. In fact, China had been tracking the person-to-person transmission for more than a month by the time that tweet went out.
The same goes for Bruce Aylward, a senior official at the World Health Organization who infamously hung up on a reporter asking about Taiwan’s (far more effective) handling of coronavirus. Mr. Aylward was apparently afraid of offending the Chinese regime” [12].
Even the left leaning, The Hill, reported that “Tedros [WHO Chief] apparently turned a blind eye to what happened in Wuhan and the rest of China and, after meeting with Xi in January, has helped China to play down the severity, prevalence and scope of the COVID-19 outbreak.”[13]
But listen to what the WHO says. “We have met the [Chinese] president. We have seen the level of knowledge he has on the outbreak, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a Feb. 12 briefing. “Don’t you appreciate that kind of leadership?” “China has done many good things to slow down the virus,” Mr. Tedros added. “There is no spinning here.”
So, there we have it, the WHO is nothing more than China’s mouth piece and lap dog. Where they will just regurgitate China’s numbers. Rendering them, unreliable as well.
Well, the CDC told all of America to include just about anyone that died as a COVID-19 death… even if it is possible they died from something else [14]. In their statement, it reads: “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.”
So, what if it was the seasonal flu, which kills tens of thousands, every year? Are they just going to assume another 20,000 deaths was COVID-19 and not what it actually may have been?! Guess so.
So, a couple of states jump on this. The more they report, the more money and resources they get. New York’s death count jumped by an additional 33% just by added the deaths of those who they assumed died by COVID-19 or may have contributed. But, they aren’t sure, they don’t know, it wasn’t confirmed. A lot of other states are following suit. Adding to their numbers UNCONFIRMED cases of people that MAY have died by some other means BUT counting them as though it was COVID-19.
But then we get the Defenders of Statism using arguments like “We need to trust the expert educated guesses.” Well, let’s do to Logical Thinking Experiment.
Very logical right? But what happens when we throw in this truth:
4. The Supreme Court opinion ruled in favor of slavery, Separate but equal, and Japanese Internment Camps.
5. Therefore, given the logic above (1-3), we must trust the Supreme Court opinions are Just because they are the experts.
Suddenly doesn’t sit well, trusting the experts.
The next Defenders of Statism may say: “We can trust experts on numbers, because number’s don’t lie.” Let’s rephrase the logical expression to be more applicable.
In these two logical premises, we see something missing. The fact that humans are prone to bias and error. Holding tightly to Premise 1 and 2 is also known as Blind Faith. Blind in that it avoids and hides from the the reality that even experts, can be bias and wrong. But, let’s keep this logical expression going.
3. NASA are experts in rocket propulsion and space travel.
4. Therefore, we must (blindly) trust NASA’s expert opinions.
Sounds valid. In fact, 99% of the time this is true. But, again, has history proves, they are prone to error. Serious error.
The Apollo 1 fire, Apollo 13 malfunction, and the Challenger explosion are all proof of their limited expertise.
But what about when it comes to research and studies?
And there are hundreds, thousands more examples of how Blind Faith in the experts can be more harmful than good.
So, here we are again, proving that Blind Faith in the CDC’s numbers is sheer sheep-like willing ignorance of the possibilities of bias and error. The CDC is funded by the federal government. The federal government continually expands power and control. Therefore, we can conclude that the more powerful and well funded the government is, the better the CDC is. Motive for bias. The staff and “experts” are paid for and funded by tax payers too. Motive for bias. This isn’t even accounting for the real possibility of human error due to the fact they are counting anyone that died, unconfirmed, but may have shown symptoms of COVID-19.
These just INCREASE the risk of bias and error within the collection and interpretation of data. New York’s death count suddenly jumped after the CDC put out their Alert 2 guidelines for counting even unconfirmed possible “expert guesses.”
There are even instances where states REMOVE death counts because of various errors. Colorado’s death count fell because they removed duplicates [15]. Pennsylvania removed A LOT because of how unreliable their data collection (from the experts) was [16]. This just proves that there is an increased risk of bias counting and errors in data collection.
Therefore, even America’s numbers are inflated and skewed by including deaths of people who were unconfirmed and may not have even had COVID-19.
*UPDATE 5/25/2020*
Shocker, the CDC released a revised report which dropped the mortality rate to seasonal flu levels… 0.26% over all, and 0.05% for people under 49 years old…[17, 18]. “ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomatic cases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.” [18]
BUT DO YOU NOTICE SOMETHING IN COMMON?
China manipulates their numbers.
The World Health Organization embraces manipulated numbers.
America inflates their numbers.
America slanders China for what the CDC officially recommends doing.
It’s almost like governments WANT scary numbers and statistical manipulation…
You make this pandemic scary enough, deadly enough, that the people are so scared they cry for help and big mommy daddy government comes to their rescue and people then start to really believe the government is their savior.
But, you don’t want it too deadly as to not kill off your loyal subjects and peasants or be unable to show how heroic the government is by controlling it and “flatten the curve.” The government wants to appear to be the hero of the people. The champion of the common good. Leads people to desire the protection of the government even more.
They you play politics as a distraction. America blames China, China blames America, the WHO plays both sides. And on and on it goes. When BOTH desire to increase the fear and power over their people. Or in China’s case, maintain the control and power over their people while America expands their power over the people.
Then those in government dependent careers, who are already in love with and dependent on the government, argue for more government resources, more government control over the situation, and will be the very ones who praise the expansion of government for more control in the future.
And this isn’t new in the history of world governments. Not even new for America.
This is the greatest expansion of government control since Japanese Internment Camps of World War II. Except, the entire population instead of one ethnic group is effected. Remember, the justification for the internment camps was for “the greater good,” built off of fear of Imperial Japanese spies…
Now, change out “Japanese Internment Camps” with “forced quarantine” for the “common good.” And change out “fear of spies” for “fear of COVID-19.” So, government oppression and control remains the same in principle, just different tools and justifications for it. If you defend and advocate for government forced quarantines for the common good, you, in principle, would defend Japanese Internment Camps…
How can you argue against Jim Crow laws, when they did the same thing in principle? Jim Crow laws limited movement of American citizens, for, at that time, though incorrect, for the common good; “separate but equal” was the justification at that time, for the common good. Now, thankfully, seen as racist laws, they were the same as now in principle. But instead of imposing the same principles of governing on a select population, they are applied to the entire population, for the common good.
So at the heart of ‘why’ is this:
America, politicians and majority of its people, liberal and conservative, desire a socialist totalitarian state. And you can’t say they don’t when they, the majority, support, defend, and advocate for socialist policies, efforts, and government actions and control…
Statistical manipulation leads to fear.
The government then swoops in and addresses those fears.
The people feel more willingly reliant on the government.
The government then assumes the responsibility for administration of goods and services for the collective, common good…
‘socialism’
nounso·cial·ism | \ ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm
Definition of socialism
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
The local, state, and federal governments collectively decided the administration of goods and services by, itself, determining what goods and services were “essential” and “non-essential” and then ordered the closure of “non-essential” for the collective “common good.”
America, by definition, implemented through threat of force, socialist policies. And that is by definition. period.
At the end of the day, don’t believe everything your told, even if it is in the form of numbers and fancy charts. Think logically, rationally, critically, and free; especially if it is coming from a politically charged government…
Some Interesting Historical Quotes to Think About:
*Facebook can flag this as “misinformation” and continue to shadow-ban like Nazis all they want, but we base this entire article of reports and sources that they feel is official news outlets. Just see all our citations above and sources below. If flagged and banned, it is the logical critical free-thinking they fear.
With the politicians and media outlets constantly pushing news updates on the Coronavirus, we all by now are aware of it, but what is it, how dangerous is it, and why the hype?
First of all, the death rate for ages 1-49 is less than the annual flu. The low is around 12,000 deaths and the high is around 56,000 deaths, annually, from the annual flu. It hit 80,000 in 2018 [1]. How many has the Coronavirus killed? 3,494… world wide [3]. With 102,228 confirmed cases, and 3,494 confirmed deaths, we can calculate a death rate of 0.034 or 3.4% Seems high, but when you look at the age groups effected you see that most of the confirmed cases were elderly which are also the higher confirmed deaths. The death rate for SARS and MERS was far greater, 10%, and 34% [6]. Here is another important fact about the Coronavirus and its death rate. 80 percent of those who died have been over the age of 60, and of those 75 percent had pre-existing conditions such as cardiovascular diseases and diabetes [6]. Compared to Ebola that killed perfectly healthy people, this flu like virus hits harder those who are already weak. How if we put it in perspective, each year an estimated 290,000 to 650,000 people die in the world due to complications from seasonal influenza viruses. That’s EACH YEAR.
*UPDATE: 4/16/2020*
The GAME of numbers and statistical manipulation; a form of propaganda. But, numbers also can’t lie. Confirmed, low death rates show how deadly it’s not. Then how do some regions have much higher death rates? Sanitation regiment and cultural hygiene may play a role but that isn’t the virus’ doing. How can New York suffer such a high amount of mortality, yet, the rest of America doesn’t? Does testing rate change the numbers? Yes, and No.
Italy and Spain (7.7%) have high testing rates with a 5.79% mortality rate. But, France and the UK have very low testing rates, with 5.7% and 5.2% mortality rates. The example here shows that testing rate doesn’t seem to matter here. What they don’t tell you is that initially, as it began, those who died were tested and made up the initial batch of stats. Therefore, the percentage WOULD be a lot higher because they made up a majority of the confirmations from the very beginning [7].
As we test more and more, we find more and more infected, surviving; and as we find more and more infected, and not dying, this drops the mortality rate. In March, the death rate was estimated around 3.4% (The W.H.O. estimation), and even they, it seemed to be an overestimate. Even Trump disagreed with those numbers (consulting with professionals) and said it’s under 1% and everyone laughed [8]. As more countries ramped up their testing, they found a vastly lower mortality rate. South Korea determined a 0.6% mortality rate given all their increased testing. China even published a study putting the mortality rate at around 2.3%
But then this study was published. A group of researchers analyzed data from China and found that the overall mortality rate of COVID-19 was 1.38%. But if they adjusted for cases that likely went unaccounted for due to their mild or asymptomatic nature, the overall mortality rate decreased to around 0.66%, they reported on March 30 in journal The Lancet Infectious Diseases [9]. Then, another study, exposed problems with the data coming out of China. Their study published in the journal Nature Medicine had found that the death rate in the city — without including those who were likely asymptomatic — was around 1.4%.
Consistent with previous research, the new study also found that the death rate varied greatly by age. While the death rate was around 0.0016% in 0 to 9-year-olds, it increased to about 7.8% for people who were age 80 and above. The researchers also found that nearly 1 in 5 people over the age of 80 infected with COVID-19 were likely to require hospitalization whereas only 1% of people under 30 were likely to be hospitalized.
THEN the CDC issued March 24, the guidance tells hospitals to list COVID-19 as a cause of death regardless of whether or not there’s actual testing to confirm that’s the case!! Instead, even if the coronavirus was just a contributing factor or if it’s “assumed to have caused or contributed to death,” it can be listed as the primary cause!! The Western Journal author even stated “It doesn’t help that data when the guidelines for determining who’s actually died of the coronavirus are profoundly vague.”
WHICH LEAD TO this:
“probable” and “presumed” is NOT accurate or confirmed.
What if they died from just the seasonal flu? After all, that infects and kills more people annually. How would they know the difference if the symptoms are very similar?
What happens when an elderly person with numerous underlying conditions comes into the hospital and dies? What happens when someone suffering from late-stage cancer or liver failure dies in the hospital? If that person was in the final stages of life and no testing is done and no autopsy conducted, what are we to assume? [12] Data manipulation is a communist propaganda strategy. Which is why China’s numbers aren’t reliable and everyone admits it. The Washington Post, shockingly, reports on China’s unreliability and their tactful manipulation of their data [13]. Even in their opinion section, they expand on that gross dishonest and manipulative behavior [14]. So, officially, if you are basing your insight and fear on numbers from China… you are officially indoctrinated by communism.
SO NOW, we have States putting out mildly unreliable data, counting those who died from a per-existing condition, as someone who died directly due to the COVID-19. AND we have extremely unreliable data coming out of China. You add those together and BAM, trash statistics, inaccurate unreliable numbers, but cause fear.
*UPDATE: 5/25/2020*
Here we are again, with another update and CDC “revision” [23] of their numbers. Shockingly, of course, as predicted, they drop the mortality rate by a lot; to 0.26% over all.
Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.
Ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomatic cases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected. [24]
Why are the death rates only higher in Democrat controlled states? Yes, their numbers are/were skewed.
*End of Update(s)*
You can start to notice some hype. News outlets compare it to Ebola and and AIDS, when, in fact, it is just a mutated flu virus [4]. And all these fancy websites are set up to ‘track’ it like some sort of massive pandemic about to bring about the end of the world [5]. The media has hitting on this 24/7. If there is negative news relate to this virus, they do news alerts, blow all the horns and whistles and talk about it non stop. You have liberal states and cities quick to declare national emergencies for ONE confirmed case. I guess all their homeless spreading all kinds of disease as they shit in the streets and leave heroin needles on the ground everywhere isn’t a big deal.
For the same reason why they politicize children, victims, homeless, and every other vulnerable population and exploit tragic events; the make a political opponent look bad.
The criticism of The President after his press conference was interesting. He is acting in his official capacity and meeting with experts to formulate a federal response. And before any sort of implication or visual result, he is already attacked. Now, this is not an enforcement for any one party or person. We have our serious disagreements with him too, but we are also fair, rational, logical, and call out hypocrisy no matter where it is.
The truth is, The Federal government shouldn’t have this much power in the first place to control our daily lives. If I don’t want to get sick, ill wear a mask, wash my hands, and avoid public places; until it dies down. If I get sick, ill follow all proper medical advice, quarantine myself, stay hydrated, get plenty of rest, and keep my fever down. I shouldn’t depend on the government to tell me what I should and should not do. Mommy Daddy government in a forced healthcare state is never a good thing. Communist China couldn’t even stop it from spreading.
Suddenly all the anti-borders, pro-immigration folks are perfectly fine with China sealing off their borders. You can’t be anymore anti-immigration than the actions that China took. Not a word from them. Why? Because they politicize immigration and all the immigrants to make a party and a president look bad. They DGAF about immigrants because they aren’t all up and arms about China…
*Update 4/16/2020*
Wow, just look at what has happened since this Article was originally published on 7 March 2020.
The government has deemed people’s livelihood as “non-essential” and forcefully closing them down. Small businesses have gone out of business. Unemployment rate has shot up to over 10% [21, 22]. What’s crazy is those elements in the Bill of Rights; those businesses directly related to those absolute rights, are deemed “non-essential”
Even POLICE DEPARTMENTS feel like your absolute RIGHT to protest is “non-essential”!
Be sure to give these piece of shit Gestapo-like police a phone call, email, or social media tag, they deserve nothing less for their oppressive mindset.
https://raleighnc.gov/policepoliceinfo@raleighnc.gov919-996-3335
And their Police Chief:
Deck-Brown, Cassandra
Cassandra.Deck-Brown@raleighnc.gov
919-996-3385https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1250098856827801600&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fpotr1774.com%2Fthe-coronavirus%2F&siteScreenName=POTR1776&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px
https://www.facebook.com/CityofRaleigh
Then, they started enforcing “stay-at-home” orders, dictating where you could and could not go. Commanding you to not leave your house or get arrested. The LOCAL governments fearlessly infringing on YOUR RIGHT to assemble [14].
THEN, these LOCAL and STATE governments ordered a RELIGION not to worship, meet, on one of their holiest of days; Easter. And, when they did, they were issued citations and some even arrested! [15, 16, 17, 18, 20]. And notice a lot of these snide self-righteous virtue-signaling peaceful slaves cheering on these local governments to violate everyone’s religious freedom [19]. What is so crazy is, here, we SEE government TELLING a religion HOW they can and can not worship…
“Pursuant to Executive Order 202.10, all non-essential gatherings of individuals of any size for any reasons (e.g. worship services, parties, celebrations, or other social events) are canceled or postponed. Congregate services within houses of worship are prohibited. Houses of worship may only be used by individuals and only where appropriate social distancing of, at least, six feet between people can be maintained. Further, individuals should not gather in houses of worship, homes, or other locations for religious services until the end of this public health emergency. If possible, religious leaders should consider alternative forms of worship, replacing in-person gatherings with virtual services, such as phone or conference calls, videoconference calls, or online streaming. “
ALL THIS IN A MATTER OF A MONTH.
The Bill of Rights (READ IT!), YOUR inalienable HUMAN RIGHTS, were disregarded and violated in less than 30 days, by YOUR local, state, and federal government…
Completely based on inflated, hyped, and inaccurate numbers of a virus that has infected and killed less people than seasonal flue…
*UPDATE: 5/25/2020*
“When controlling for the differences in population across states, the number of deaths from coronavirus is over three times higher in states with Democratic governors than in states with Republican governors. As of Sunday, April 26, states with Republican governors have experienced 57.53 coronavirus deaths per million of population, states with Democratic governors have 179.74 deaths per million of population. Even excluding the state of New York as an extreme outlier, states with Democratic governors have 138.58 deaths per million from coronavirus, still over twice as many coronavirus deaths per million as deaths in states with Republican governors.” – James R. Rogers [25]
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo won glowing reviews in the news media for his handling of the state at the epicenter of the crisis, though the reviews have started to dim. Republican governors, however, were vilified for moving slowly to order total lockdowns or being the first to lift restrictions [26].
Odd, its almost as if a certain ideology is actively counting more deaths, that may not be corona-virus related, to induce fear and elicit more funding from the federal government. States that are going broke, such as California…
*End of update(s)*
As we see, investors are weak-minded sissies who bought into the scary hype. They acted like Apple and Microsoft wouldn’t recover… The worlds biggest tech companies wouldn’t survive a dip in production… so like weak minded hopeless sissies do, they sell off. Thus, the major dips in the stockmarket.
Then we have the media constantly beating the horrors of the flu into our heads and some how tying it into how poor the president is doing at containing the situation… COMMUNIST CHINA COULDN’T CONTAIN IT. Stfu MSNBC, CNN, even Fox. When you’re in a public place and you see this propaganda on the tv, change the channel.
The virus will die out.
The economy WILL recover.
The human race will go on.
You just may want to invest in companies that diversify their labor factories in more than just one country. Mexico and India are good alternatives to China alone… just a thought.
But this sissy knee jerk reaction to something that takes place annually needs to stop. Confront the fearmongers and shut up their pathetic attempts to control the weak.
The government, as proven, is NOT fighting for your rights, they careless about your rights, and have proven it in the COVID-19 era.
Sources:
The first important question is SHOULD we, as Christians, make judgements on a person, or groups of people, based on Statistics? Can we rightly judge solely based on statistical analysis? Why is this even an issue? It goes to the heart of using statistics to see a need for the gospel. Of course, everyone, at all times everywhere, need the gospel, even we need the gospel. But Jesus strategically went to specific areas and the Apostles went to specific areas, whether it was locations or people groups. But how did they rightly judge where to go and who needed what message first. What does this have to do with racial profiling, prejudice, and rightful judgements?
If there was a community where 98% of the community participated in a survey stating that they are atheists and there was another community where they were all surveyed and was found that 98% were repentant Gospel focused people… it seems that we see a ‘greater’ situational need for one community over another. Jesus reveals the distinction in need in Luke 5:31. Paul makes the same point in Romans 10:14-15. This seems to justify the application of statistics to recognize a greater need. But is the judgement discerning more important situational need or a judgement of the people?
What happens when the statistics do not survey the entire community or entire people or nation but only a small portion. If a people group, we will use Smurfs for our example, has a survey where only 15% of the entire people group is surveyed and the results claim that 98% of Smurfs are atheists; are we right to assume that the rest of the 85% are more than likely atheists too? So when we hear about the Smurfs, are we right to assume every individual Smurf is an atheist? Lets say it another way. If there are 100 Smurfs, and 15 of them are surveyed, and 14 of them claim to be atheists, can we rightly judge the 85 other non surveyed Smurfs as atheists? Keep in mind, we have never met these 85 unsurveyed Smurfs. So, before we meet them, can we assume they don’t believe in God? OR do we see a situational need? Is there a difference? Lets magnify those numbers. What if there are 10,000,000 Smurf people and 1,500,000 were surveyed, and 1,400,000 claim to be atheists. Can we rightly assume the rest of the unsurveyed 8,500,000 other Smurfs are atheists too? This still leads to the same question.
Lets change the survey focus from “atheism” to “below X house hold income level“. And “X” is determined by an overall societal income average. If there are 10,000,000 Smurfs and 1,500,000 were surveyed, and 1,400,000 were below X house hold income level. Can we rightly assume the rest of the unsurveyed 8,500,000 other Smurfs are below X house hold income level too? No matter the statistical focus, the issue is still the same: Can we rightly judge all those who were not surveyed based on those who were? Would it be prejudicial (“a preconceived opinion not based on actual experience“) to view the all the other unsurveyed 8,500,000 as impoverished too?
Would it be wrong to assume they are all impoverished, based on their ethnic group and the statistics? That every time we hear about a person of that people group, can we assume they are more than likely poor?
What if a survey was conducted that showed Smurfs are responsible for more than half of all violent crime. If you were in a room of Smurfs, would you be justified to feel scared? For no other reason than them being Smurfs and that stat? If poverty directly influences crime rates, and Smurfs were surveyed showing they mostly live below the poverty level, would you then also be justified to be scared around Smurfs? Are these judgements based on their ethnicity and statistics justified?
The premise of the judgement is WHAT justifies us to judge those who we don’t personally know. OR do these kinds of stats lead us to prejudice and profiling? And is prejudice and profiling wrong?
The Don’t Judge Me Crowd
Clearly anyone who feels it is wrong to “judge” anyone are hypocritical when making assumptions about ace based stats. They are still making a judgement on someone they don’t know directly. Even if they do know the person, and tell the person not to judge them, they have still actually judged that person. They tell people not to judge them unless they have walked in their shoes but then judge other races based on stats… THAT is telling someone to take the speck out of their eye while you have a log in yours. The very same hypocritical judgement Jesus is talking about. If you go around and tell people not to judge you and you actively avoid ANY kind of judgement, you have already failed logically, rationally and, even, become disobedient to Christ (Lev. 19:15; Zech 8:16; John 7:24, 51; Luke 12:57). We CAN rightly judge and are called to. BUT, is judging a person based on statistics “rightly judging” or is in sin?
He Said, She Said, so You Must Be.
Would it then still be wrongful to make a judgement (assumption) about someone you have never met even when it is based on stats? How do you know those stats directly represent that person? You don’t. You have to apply an ignorant assumption and essentially hope (even have faith in your own judgement) that the stat does represent that person directly. According to Scripture, an ignorant assumption/ judgement about someone is unjust and not a rightful judgement because it is not based on the truth about that person… but is actually and truly based on a possible truth about someone else (the person(s) surveyed). It would be no different than believing gossip or second or third hand-talk about someone else. Someone spoke to some people, compiled the numbers, published a study, and then apply that ignorantly to someone else you don’t even know, with no knowledge if it directly applies to them, simply because of their race. That is in no way a justified righteous judgement in light of scripture.
Rightful Judgements – John 7:24
God IS the standard of righteousness and he alone is the author of just judgements (Psalm 7:11, 9:8; Isaiah 33:22). They are based on KNOWN TRUTHS about THAT specific person. Jesus tells us absolutely we CAN SEE the fruit of someones heart and KNOW them (Matthew 7:15-20; Luke 6:43-45). We must first fix ourselves “then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye” (Matthew 17:5). God himself empowers us to be able to rightly judge (Judges 2:18). We ARE to judge those who profess to know Christ (1 Cor. 5:12), this is how we keep each other accountable to the Lord (2 Timothy 2:25, 3:16; Titus 2:1). We are called to correct and rebuke each other; which requires us to have the ability to rightly judge (2 Thessalonians 3:6; 1 Timothy 6:20). Discernment, rightly judging, and correction are to keep unity (Ephesians 4:13; Galatians 6:1), only the hard hearted, self-righteous, fall away. And all righteous and just judgements come from God, and God has given us his very word (Ephesians 2:20). John the Baptist corrected Herodias (Mark 6:18-19). Paul corrected Peter (Galatians 2:11). They were filled with truth and knowledge (Colossians 1:9) and they obediently reproved and rebuked (2 Timothy 4:2) just as Jesus himself required (Matthew 18:15-17). ALL of which requires us to have the ability to Judge in the first place.
Assuming the facts before knowing them is a wrongful judgement (Prov. 18:13). Assuming to know someone based on their looks or gossip is also a sinful humanistic mistake (Luke 7:36-50). Assuming to be righteous where others are unrighteous, yet, actually falling in the same sin is a hypocritical judgemental error (Romans 2:1; Matthew 7:3-5). If you hold people to a perfect standard, and judge them for not meeting your self-righteous standard, you are judged by that same standard (Matthew 7:2). Assuming you are more righteous in your ignorance is sinful humanistic error (James 4:6; Luke 18:9-14). Assuming you know someone, when in fact you don’t, and then judging them based on your false assumption is a sinful untrue judgement (Prov. 19:5).
Thus we can see the core elements that makes a Godly Righteous Judgement is first having TRUE ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE in direct regards and then discerning the rightfulness or wrongfulness with a clear mind and conscience, according to the whole council of God (Acts 20:27).
Seeing how Holy Scripture speaks about rightful and wrongful judgements, we already see a inconsistency with statistical judgements applied to individuals.
Racial Profiling and Prejudice
Having all these statistical studies can help see potential issues within a society and a situation BUT they are not the identities of the people they test. Even when it SEEMS harmless and “positive”, it is a contrary to Scripture and rightful judgements. Here’s an example: The NBA is 75% African American. The WMBA is 70% African American [2]. The biggest percentage of NCAA basketball athletes are African American [1]. Lastly, just about all the top high school basketball teams are majority African American [3]. From high school, to college, all the way to the pros. In every major organized basketball organization the majority of athletes are African American. Using the same reasoning to justify racial systemic inequality, can it be assumed that African Americans like basketball? That’s a harmless assumption right? Buying a basketball for an African American teen for his birth day isn’t racist right? Statistics would support the likelihood of him enjoying the gift. BUT why is there something inherently wrong with this kind of ‘harmless’ and ‘positive’ assumption?
The Moral Issue
We are applying what someone else says about another person, to them, and we don’t even know if it is true. We just assume it is. Its easier to assume something about someone and justify it with numbers from someone else. The Jews just assumed all Gentiles were hopeless and godless. They had stats to back up their assumptions about the gentiles. They did not have The Law of Moses. They did not have the Writings of The Prophets. They were not lead out of slavery from Egypt. They, at that time, and generations prior, were not declared as God’s Chosen people. BUT JESUS destroyed their statistical assumptions. Jesus GOES DEEPER than their statistically justified judgements. GOD shows that HIS WILL is more vast than statistical probabilities and averages. That HUMANS can not calculate and quantify God’s Will; and to assume so is our self-righteousness self-idolatry rearing its ugly head- even in the seemingly harmless positive assumptions/judgements.
THE ULTIMATE HYPOCRISY
It is wrong to assume all African Americans like basketball for the same reason it is wrong to assume all “white” people are privileged. Both are “positive” conclusions drawn from different areas of statistical data that seem to support and justify the conclusions. BUT, YOU CAN NOT KNOW if these assumptions are true about an individual UNLESS you KNOW THAT individual personally.
When you ASSUME YOU KNOW someone, that you actually don’t know, you feel RIGHT about your assumed knowledge of them, without really knowing if your are in fact right. Then, you justify this self-delusion of rightness with statistics that may not even directly relate to that person you don’t know. You are in essence, hypocritically judging them because you don’t even know them- and yet, you feel right about them in your true ignorance of them.
To arbitrarily say you CAN assume knowledge of an unknown person, with stats, regarding “positive” and “harmless” ideas; but you CANNOT assume, with stats, regarding “negative” and “offensive” ideas is HYPOCRITICAL. Logically, one can do both and remain rationally consistent (the moral issue aside). So lets look at “negative” and “offensive” assumptions that one can (but shouldn’t) make justified by statistics.
The Negative and Offensive Stats
According to Jones RK and Jerman J, Population Group Abortion Rates and Lifetime Incidence of Abortion: United States, 2008–2014, American Journal of Public Health, 2017. 27% of African Americans, aged 15-44, have had an abortion. THEREFORE, If we were in a room with 4 African American females ages 15-44; I would then be justified to assume that at least one of them have had an Abortion, simply because of their race and the statistic. To have this idea, I have assumed I have knowledge of at least one of them, even though I really and truly have no idea about any.
According to the FBI’s expanded data chart of 2015 homicides [4]; African Americans kill other African Americans with a rate of 89%; while white on white homicides was at a rate of 81%. White Americans are killed by African Americans at a rate of 15.7%, but White Americans kill African Americans only at a rate of 5.8%. From this data we see that in 2015, not only did more same-race murders happen with African American, but African Americans murdered more White Americans than the other way around, and almost by triple the likelihood. Is a White American fear of African American violence justified? Is that kind of assumption/judgement right? Of course not!
There are all kinds of studies being conducted and all kinds of interpretations and assumptions people will make from all these studies BUT we will always come back to the paramount issue: SHOULD we use all these studies to justify judgements of people we have never met? and the same question can be asked again: Can we rightly judge all those who were not surveyed based on those who were?
SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS
We ARE boasting in our self-righteousness when we believe we are justified in the rightness of our judgements when applying stats to people we have never met, and have no true knowledge of, then drawing a conclusion about that person in our self presumed rightness.
We THINK we can have the knowledge of God, knowing what we do not know. We THINK we can be RIGHT in our own knowledge about someone when we, in reality, have no knowledge about that person in direct relation to our assumption and the stat. We THINK we are JUST in our judgements solely based on what other “experts” tell us about unknown people- yet, we are hypocrites because the judgement is UNJUST because the person is actually unknown and we do not know the truth about that person.
CONCLUSION
Statistics can aid us in opening our eyes to injustice and spotting unjust SITUATIONS and societal trends BUT becomes SIN in our hearts and minds when we believe we can use it and apply it to PEOPLE and know people, we do not actually know. We then use statistics to self-righteously JUSTIFY racial profiling, where we convince ourselves that we CAN KNOW an unknown person, positive or negative, which feeds our natural inclination of prejudice and self-idolatry- which only leads to one primal thing- racism and hatred. And that racism and hatred is based all on the ignorant assumptions and judgements applied to people we don’t know, all justified initially by stats, then by our sinful hearts. Collectivism is contrary to God.
To be absolutely clear. Statistics and statistical studies CAN aid us in exposing injustice and oppression within a system and society. Is there currently, within America, systemic racism? We believe that the statistical data does point to this. Is there racism of other races in other countries, we think there is evidence to support this as well. The statistical data reveals the situational issue and points us to a spiritual just focus and a gospel need. BUT to then continue on and apply the broad statistics to unknown individuals collectively is simply wrong and immoral. We have NO true knowledge of an unknown person, and therefore, we can not, before God, be just and right in any sort of judgement about that person. We can not be right, and actually in sin, when we assume all African Americans like basketball, using the example previously discussed. We can not be right, and actual in sin, when we assume all white people are privileged. Again, that would require us to apply ignorant assumptions collectively to an unknown person to which we have NO true knowledge of.
The distinction between rightful judging with statistics and sinful judgementalism with statistics is to which the assumption/judgement is applied to. Situational and cultural awareness or judgement of an individual. To expose a broken society, or to judge an individual in the society. To reveal injustice, or to unjustly judge a person. To rightly see the systemic trends, or to claim to know the unknown individual. To rightly judge conditions justified by scripture, or to wrongfully judge a person justified by self-righteous ignorance.
This goes to the heart of Social Justice and Civil Rights. The church needs to SEE the statistical support for modern systemic racism, injustice, and oppression AND stand against the oppression, and injustice; BUT at the same time, be careful not to fall into disunity, dividing the Body of Christ through prejudice, racial profiling, and the untrue falsehoods of collectivism ignorantly justified with all sorts of statistical interpretations. Ignoring or discrediting systemic racism is dishonest but breaking fellowship and supporting disunity from “white evangelicalism” is equally unjust and unrighteous. The open willfulness to segregate yourself and your family from other races is sinful for all people. Peter was rightly and justly rebuked by Paul for this!
On Sunday, go to a less diverse church, and worship with other Brothers and Sisters in Christ of a different race. Participate in diversity ministries or less diverse ministries, and serve the Lord together. Break the sinful wall of prejudice, racial profiling, willful segregation, collectivism, all of are justified by statistics; be a light in the world for unity, grace, mercy, forgiveness, and love. Actually FOLLOW Christ without favoritism or partiality for one race or another.
1. 2016-2017 http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/displayResultsPercents.
2. http://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/17954156/wnba-scores-high-racial-gender-report-card
3. http://www.maxpreps.com/polls/basketball/xcellent25.htm
4. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2015.xls
THE AMERICAN LIFE JOURNAL 