89 Comments

Watch the Rob Montz mini-doc

Expand full comment

It can be true that Mr. Fryer is a brilliant economist AND that he repeatedly crossed the line with 5 different women, not just his assistant and created a hostile work environment by sexually harassing these women. 5. Not 1.

Expand full comment

And now we've learned more about Claudine G.

Expand full comment

More proof that Harvard, founded on the opium trade and funded by deep state crimes against humanity, existence is threatened by educated truth seekers and truth speakers. This institution is dying. None of these satanic universities will survive this information war we are profoundly immersed in.

Expand full comment

depressing, in the 21st century and we are still plagued by bullies and cowards. I am really sorry to hear this about the man.

Expand full comment

Fryer’s sexual harassment claim seems to have been a major factor. Neil DeGrasse Tyson was put in a timeout for a white after a similar complaint, that could not be supported was filed against him. I don’t know his politics. The former Lt. Gov. of Virginia, Justin Fairfax a Democrat had is career derailed by harassment charges that were never fully investigated.

Getting back to Fryer, his controversial paper found that there was police abuse when it came to lower level crimes. He did not find interested use of firearms by police when it came to higher level crimes. In an interview with Coleman Hughes, he not given experiences with police, Black people were going to be suspicious when a Black person was killed by police. There was no trust.

When you hear that the Louisville police department was full of racist behavior according to the DOJ, you can’t be surprised by the distrust.

Expand full comment

The paper said that Black suspects were less likely to be killed by police in similar situations, but more likely to be beaten. The main comment on the academic site disputing this was the claim that the difference was that the white suspects were on drugs. Considering subsequent events, this is interesting at the least.

Expand full comment

Robert, please edit your post. Parts were impossible to understand.

"He did not find interested use of firearms by police when it came to higher level crimes. In an interview with Coleman Hughes, he not given experiences with police,"

Expand full comment

Tyson was accused of rape and sexual advances by 4 women and Fairfax of sexual assualt. Whereas Fryer was accused of telling off color jokes. They are not remotely similar.

Expand full comment

DeGrasse Tyson said that he was innocent. Fairfax wanted an open trial. Fryer sent a letter of apology.

Expand full comment

Yes, he admitted to his bad behavior and apologized. I can respect that and as I stated above, it was 5 women who accused him, not just his assistant.

Expand full comment

Hey what happened to the link? Whocanceledroland doesn't work; the page says that it's expired.

Expand full comment
founding

Dear Prof. Loury, I see that The Truth about Roland Fryer remains one of your most popular articles. You may have seen that Claudine Gay will become Harvard University's next President. She was among those who tried to destroy Roland Fryer's career at Harvard. Might you take this subject on? Here is a December 16 post in Francis Menton's Manhattan Contrarian. https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2022-12-15-goodnight-poor-harvard

Expand full comment

Fryer and Sowell literally changed my perspective and my life. Please help Fryer.

Expand full comment

GEORGE: I really can't comprehend how stupid people can be sometimes. Can you comprehend it?

KRAMER: No, no I can't comprehend it?

Expand full comment
Jul 31, 2022·edited Jul 31, 2022

I cannot say my mind is blown or heart is broken. I’ve seen injustice happening too many times. I have a few questions though. Why has Roland taken it/gone along with Harvard’s punishment? Aren’t there reputable institutions left interested in luring a mind of Roland’s magnitude? Where are all the wealthy people with integrity willing to finance continuation of the Roland’s brilliance? There gotta be some? If they step forward, what would Roland’s response be?

Expand full comment

Watched your clip with John McWhorter on the talk and the findings of Roland. I disagree with John that Roland has proven bias in non lethal contact. The data is too incomplete to do that. There are a bunch of things Roland Fryer does not account for. In his Stop and Frisk analysis he does not factor for poverty. In his PPCS analysis, he factors for civilian income and the civilian population at the civilian's address. What he didn't or couldn't factor in was average income and crime rates at the point of the stop. He also couldn't factor for average biased fear of civilians by factors such as 'the talk' that could lead to different perception of the interaction (i.e microaggressions for example), and how they react to that perception, and how they recall it for the PPCS. Similarly in the Stop and Frisk there is no way to assess what the behavior of the person stopped was, based on prior perception and minor escalations. All these things could show a discrepancy in interactions. If you have a higher rate of perception of offense, a higher rate of visiting lower income, relatively higher crime areas (friends, family, etc), and higher rates of recidivism (people who gain higher income but come from higher crime areas tend to have higher rates of recidivism), there could be a higher risk of police escalation. Until all those elements are factored in, racism, or even any subliminal bias is not proven.

Expand full comment

Just curious, how do you know that all variables you mentioned have not been factored in? Another one, why should any of them be?

Expand full comment

Thank you for speaking the truth and sharing this video. I shall repost it.

Expand full comment

I listened to a podcast on Coleman Hughes interviewing Roland Fryer and was very impressed. The man is brilliant and so clear minded. His view is desperately needed in this half truth media obsessed environment. Then I watched the documentary and was frustrated, angry but not surprised. Particularly knowing about the ideologs who took Roland down. I wish there was a way for him to sue Harvard for this but suspect not at this point.

Expand full comment

So very interesting to me that absolutely none of the 78 people who reviewed this post when I shared on LinkedIn in, including friends and family, people I think highly of, liked or disliked or commented at all. The fear is real.

Expand full comment

certainly is

Expand full comment

I appreciate the efforts that went into creating and presenting this doc.This is the first really 'fleshed-out' description I've seen of the Roland Fryer incident. Can't say that any of the facts in the case surprise me. Sadly.

As a former educator, I have great hope for his Reconstruction project.

Expand full comment