|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on May 16, 2018 10:08:17 GMT -5
This discussion is fascinating and I don’t think the poster is doing anything wrong (other than thread detailing). If anything, discuss this is in a dedicated thread. I do find it interesting learning how people I don’t agree with think and why they believe what they do and I think there’s so much to be learned, both by those who don’t agree with him and hopefully by him as well. Shutting people out because they disagree will solve nothing. I also argue that trying to convince people that they should believe what you believe will solve nothing. What might work? Asking them to explain why they believe or think what they do and help them understand why you believe what you do and aim for and agree to disagree. I think this is one of the few examples where that’s kind of happening - but it might require rephrasing certain questions - or asking them one at a time.
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 16, 2018 13:34:23 GMT -5
This discussion is fascinating and I don’t think the poster is doing anything wrong (other than thread detailing). If anything, discuss this is in a dedicated thread. I do find it interesting learning how people I don’t agree with think and why they believe what they do and I think there’s so much to be learned, both by those who don’t agree with him and hopefully by him as well. Shutting people out because they disagree will solve nothing. I also argue that trying to convince people that they should believe what you believe will solve nothing. What might work? Asking them to explain why they believe or think what they do and help them understand why you believe what you do and aim for and agree to disagree. I think this is one of the few examples where that’s kind of happening - but it might require rephrasing certain questions - or asking them one at a time. Note, my intention wasn't to derail, though that might have been the result. People brought up how other artists could be affected, and double standards, and I thought Zara Larsson (or Melanie Martinez possibly now that I think about it), would be potential double standards. And that's when all the drama started. I suppose I could've ignored it, but it's hard not to make a rebuttal. And thank you. Typically, I don't try to insult or anything of the sort. And honestly, I do hate when it devolves into that, because it shuts down discussion entirely and turns it into an ad hominem fest. Nobody said racism wasn't real. Maybe get better at reading comprehension? Part of my argument was literally anyone can be racist regardless of skin colour.The real question is, why does that matter when it's black people getting police called on them for meeting at Starbucks, BBQing in a public park, etc? Why is that your focus when it's black people consistently being shot by police for no valid reason? Why does that matter when it's black people who are over-represented in prisons? Why does that matter when it's black people who are over-represented when it comes to being of lower economic status? You also said earlier a very small amount of people are racist. Nope. Many are racist, as this trend of calling the police on black people doing everyday things is showing. Of course Karen says she didn't call cops because the people were black, so in other words she is in denial/ignorance of her racism. As are you, it seems. Well, that story of Starbucks isn't exactly valid. They're a business. They didn't kick them out for being black. They weren't purchasing anything, and were just taking up space. That was the policy at that individual Starbucks. If a business tells you to leave and you don't, you are trespassing. So the arrest was appropriate. How do you know what the employee kicking them out's intention was? Is it because it was a white person? If they were black, would you have said it was for their race? So wait... If they deny that they were doing for racist reasons, they're just racist? That's quite flawed logic, I'd say. If you actually look at crime statistics, while yes, it doesn't exactly match, blacks commit crime at a higher rate than other racial groups. Am I denying a racial bias of sorts? No. There are racial and sex biases. And police brutality... That's not a black only issue. You had a white guy begging for his life and an officer still shot him down. That's your problem. You're seeing everything through the scope of race. When it's not. Today, issues affect all people. Domestic violence, sexual assault, and rape are commonly seen as "women's issues", when they affect men significantly as well (as I said prior, almost half of domestic violence victims are men in the UK). It shouldn't be "who's more likely to be victimized" (because it isn't a contest), but how do we deter and possibly stop the victimization for everyone? And separating people by these characteristics just makes it worse, not better. And yes. A small amount of people are racist. Just as a small amount of people are rapists, and killers, and pedophiles. They're just the ones given attention. The world is more tolerant and peaceful than it ever has been. The US is quite tolerant in comparison to say, Asia. A lot countries with higher white populations actually.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,533
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 16, 2018 13:47:55 GMT -5
If you actually look at crime statistics, while yes, it doesn't exactly match, blacks commit crime at a higher rate than other racial groups. Commit crimes at a higher rate, or are arrested for crimes at a higher rate? And regardless, there is a discussion about the 'why' anyway. One example of a white guy begging for his life doesn't mean that police brutality isn't predominantly an issue that affects minorities. For one, by and large throughout the world, women are victims of those things more than men. And while of course we want to eradicate those things for all people, I don't think you can group them together. As in, perhaps the reason women are raped is different than when men are raped, and if you address them as one problem, you don't solve the problem. Please show me the research that supports these statements.
|
|
Au$tin
Diamond Member
Pop Culture Guru
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 54,543
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his/him
|
Post by Au$tin on May 16, 2018 13:56:36 GMT -5
No, Nachos did not turn yet another thread into a moment where he declares privilege and racism aren't real. What is this, like the 4th thread? Nobody said racism wasn't real. Maybe get better at reading comprehension? Part of my argument was literally anyone can be racist regardless of skin colour. I'm generalizing all of your arguments over the past two months, not talking about this one particular time, with the main point being you're derailing a thread yet again with a political narrative that isn't there to begin with. Maybe try bettering your own reading comprehension before criticizing others. Also, by stating privilege is something made up inside the heads of minorities, you are vicariously saying racism isn't real as privilege is a consequence of racism and racial privilege cannot exist without racism. So, yeah, you kind of are, but I wouldn't expect you to grasp that concept.
|
|
Au$tin
Diamond Member
Pop Culture Guru
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 54,543
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his/him
|
Post by Au$tin on May 16, 2018 14:00:37 GMT -5
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,533
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 16, 2018 14:11:12 GMT -5
I think 'hate content' and 'hateful conduct' are odd terms as that isn't how most people would characterize what R Kelly and others have done. "Hate" is usually associated with racist actions, not sexual assault.
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 16, 2018 14:58:59 GMT -5
Commit crimes at a higher rate, or are arrested for crimes at a higher rate? And regardless, there is a discussion about the 'why' anyway. Could be because there's higher rates of poverty among blacks. But poverty doesn't excuse crime (though it may explain it), nor does it change the data. Just as men being more likely to be convicted of crimes for a reason. Because they commit more crime. 52% of people police kill are white, while 31% are black. When you consider crime rates, that doesn't make things look so bad. And the problem is, there isn't reliable data on "police brutality" in and of itself. Again... Not a victim contest? But, the amount of support needed doesn't match the numbers. For domestic violence specifically, 1 in 4 men and 1 in 3 women have been victims of physical violence by their partners in their lifetimes. I can assure you women get far more support than men do on this matter. 1 in 6 women compared to 1 in 71 men. Sure, that may seem far less, but that's still a pretty significant amount. By putting all support into one group affected, you are effectively ostracizing all other victims. Also doesn't help when they are always by default, perpetrators. www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/15/a-fascinating-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-racially-tolerant-countries/?utm_term=.f2efef3da163Anglo and Latin countries were shown to be the most racially tolerant. Unsurprising, given they're less likely to be homogenous. And to Austin... No. Racism does not mean racial privilege exists. As individuals can be racist. It doesn't mean any sort of privilege exists.
|
|
YourFaveIsAFlop
5x Platinum Member
Catch me in the fridge, right where the ice be
Joined: April 2014
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by YourFaveIsAFlop on May 16, 2018 17:00:51 GMT -5
Well, that story of Starbucks isn't exactly valid. They're a business. They didn't kick them out for being black. They weren't purchasing anything, and were just taking up space. That was the policy at that individual Starbucks. If a business tells you to leave and you don't, you are trespassing. So the arrest was appropriate. How do you know what the employee kicking them out's intention was? Is it because it was a white person? The men arrived at the Starbucks at 4:35 PM. The police were called 4:37. The Starbucks employee who called the cops said that they "were refusing to make a purcase or leave". When in those 2 minutes were they supposed to make a purchase or leave? How did the employee know in those 2 minutes that they weren't going to buy anything? Were they even told to leave before the cops were called in those 2 minutes? So you tell me, what was the employee's intention?
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on May 16, 2018 17:12:45 GMT -5
Well, that story of Starbucks isn't exactly valid. They're a business. They didn't kick them out for being black. They weren't purchasing anything, and were just taking up space. That was the policy at that individual Starbucks. If a business tells you to leave and you don't, you are trespassing. So the arrest was appropriate. I'm going to jump in on this for a second. Ok, with this statement. You're not wrong. I doubt the person (or persons) who called the cops on two loitering black men did so because they were black (or men). Let's agree with that one. Why this becomes a race issue is because of hypotheticals. If they were white, would the employee(s) have called the cops? Now, I realize jumping into hypotheticals is dangerous territory but that's where we go right to the source and ask people directly. The amazing thing here is, black people all over the continent report being harassed by employees of stores whereas white people don't. Now, I'm NOT saying white people are never asked to leave Starbucks or never followed around a store by security just because. Nobody ever says that. But when you compare the experiences of black vs. white folks, black folks consistently report higher rates of harassment. I think you did bring up a good point about class and lower-income people vs. high-income people. I think that deserves more emphasis in this discussion than is ever given - BUT, I think the natural unintended kick-yourself-for-thinking-it assumption by most is that, unless a black man is well dressed, he's probably poor, whereas a white man can dress casual and few people will make the assumption that he's poor. So in many ways, class does = race. Going back to your use of the word racism. I think you seem to believe that in order for someone to be racist, it has to be on purpose. Using the Starbucks employees again. Kicking out two black men isn't racist. Kicking out two black men when they wouldn't have kicked out two white men for doing the exact same thing is racist. Now, I go to Starbucks quite a lot. Sometimes I go into a Starbucks and wait a few minutes before order. Sometimes I use the washroom before I order. I've even gone into a Starbucks to use the washroom and didn't buy anything. I've never been arrested or asked to leave and as far as I know, I've never even had an employee even look at me suspiciously. But I'm white.
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 16, 2018 18:27:16 GMT -5
Well, that story of Starbucks isn't exactly valid. They're a business. They didn't kick them out for being black. They weren't purchasing anything, and were just taking up space. That was the policy at that individual Starbucks. If a business tells you to leave and you don't, you are trespassing. So the arrest was appropriate. I'm going to jump in on this for a second. Ok, with this statement. You're not wrong. I doubt the person (or persons) who called the cops on two loitering black men did so because they were black (or men). Let's agree with that one. Why this becomes a race issue is because of hypotheticals. If they were white, would the employee(s) have called the cops? Now, I realize jumping into hypotheticals is dangerous territory but that's where we go right to the source and ask people directly. The amazing thing here is, black people all over the continent report being harassed by employees of stores whereas white people don't. Now, I'm NOT saying white people are never asked to leave Starbucks or never followed around a store by security just because. Nobody ever says that. But when you compare the experiences of black vs. white folks, black folks consistently report higher rates of harassment. I think you did bring up a good point about class and lower-income people vs. high-income people. I think that deserves more emphasis in this discussion than is ever given - BUT, I think the natural unintended kick-yourself-for-thinking-it assumption by most is that, unless a black man is well dressed, he's probably poor, whereas a white man can dress casual and few people will make the assumption that he's poor. So in many ways, class does = race. Going back to your use of the word racism. I think you seem to believe that in order for someone to be racist, it has to be on purpose. Using the Starbucks employees again. Kicking out two black men isn't racist. Kicking out two black men when they wouldn't have kicked out two white men for doing the exact same thing is racist. Now, I go to Starbucks quite a lot. Sometimes I go into a Starbucks and wait a few minutes before order. Sometimes I use the washroom before I order. I've even gone into a Starbucks to use the washroom and didn't buy anything. I've never been arrested or asked to leave and as far as I know, I've never even had an employee even look at me suspiciously. But I'm white. Kind of what I was saying. Just assuming their actions were racist doesn't quite work. I've went to the restroom without a purchase once a week at my Starbucks. And I'm not white (not fully anyway). I do agree that the bias regarding clothing is sometimes there, but for some, it isn't. Like for me, clothing goes a lot into first impressions. If you're wearing cheap clothes, regardless of race, I assume you're poor. Won't judge someone for it though, it's just my personal observation. Not trying to sound racist, though you could argue the gang culture that unfortunately plagues the black community is part of that (gang members tend to be from impoverished homes and people who lack acceptance from other groups). And no, I'm not saying blacks are the only ways to take part in this, or that most of black people do, it's just the most visible. Racism doesn't have to be on purpose, but it does have to have racial reasons behind it. And racism tends to be learned and deliberate, not inherent. Though ignorance could be a part of racism (as is the case in racially homogenous populations a lot of the time). Well, that story of Starbucks isn't exactly valid. They're a business. They didn't kick them out for being black. They weren't purchasing anything, and were just taking up space. That was the policy at that individual Starbucks. If a business tells you to leave and you don't, you are trespassing. So the arrest was appropriate. How do you know what the employee kicking them out's intention was? Is it because it was a white person? The men arrived at the Starbucks at 4:35 PM. The police were called 4:37. The Starbucks employee who called the cops said that they "were refusing to make a purcase or leave". When in those 2 minutes were they supposed to make a purchase or leave? How did the employee know in those 2 minutes that they weren't going to buy anything? Were they even told to leave before the cops were called in those 2 minutes? So you tell me, what was the employee's intention? I couldn't tell you the employee's intention. Because assuming their intention is flawed either way. To assume it's racism is dumb. Just because a white person does something that negatively impacts a black person, that doesn't mean it's racist. It has to have that specific intention, for racial reasons. But as I said, I can't know their intentions. But you couldn't either. Unless they were made obvious (like, if they used a slur).
|
|
JamaicaFunk²
Diamond Member
Will & Grace!
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 13,774
|
Post by JamaicaFunk² on May 16, 2018 19:08:51 GMT -5
Commit crimes at a higher rate, or are arrested for crimes at a higher rate? And regardless, there is a discussion about the 'why' anyway. Could be because there's higher rates of poverty among blacks. But poverty doesn't excuse crime (though it may explain it), nor does it change the data. Just as men being more likely to be convicted of crimes for a reason. Because they commit more crime. 52% of people police kill are white, while 31% are black. But black people make up less then 31% of the population. And, white people make up more than 52% of the population.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on May 16, 2018 19:10:04 GMT -5
Kind of what I was saying. Just assuming their actions were racist doesn't quite work. I've went to the restroom without a purchase once a week at my Starbucks. And I'm not white (not fully anyway). I do agree that the bias regarding clothing is sometimes there, but for some, it isn't. Like for me, clothing goes a lot into first impressions. If you're wearing cheap clothes, regardless of race, I assume you're poor. Won't judge someone for it though, it's just my personal observation. Not trying to sound racist, though you could argue the gang culture that unfortunately plagues the black community is part of that (gang members tend to be from impoverished homes and people who lack acceptance from other groups). And no, I'm not saying blacks are the only ways to take part in this, or that most of black people do, it's just the most visible. Racism doesn't have to be on purpose, but it does have to have racial reasons behind it. And racism tends to be learned and deliberate, not inherent. Though ignorance could be a part of racism (as is the case in racially homogenous populations a lot of the time). So we agree that racism doesn't have to be on purpose. Not sure what you mean by racial reasons though. I mean, for me, I don't consider myself racist and do try to do what I can to avoid that - much of which comes from educating myself when and where I can and listening to other people. I'd be lying if I said I didn't make assumptions about people based on race, as much as I try to avoid it or quickly backtrack to myself, the fact of the matter is, the thought was there and it was something I couldn't help. I'm not saying it's something I or anyone else is born with. It's definitely taught, and not necessarily by parents or family. Much of it is taught through culture and exposure from entertainment and our surroundings. News, movies, history, etc. You say you're a visible minority and that you've never felt discriminated against or any sort of racism toward you. That's amazing. You're definitely very lucky to have that, whether you realize it or not, or even if you want to admit it. I think the thing you're failing to do in this and every discussion like this is listen. You're taking your experience as a visible minority and applying it to every other visible minority, basically telling them they're wrong. The men who were arrested for literally standing in a Starbucks for 2 minutes would have been arrested if they were white? The white mother who called the cops on two Native American teenagers because their very presence made her nervous. Do you think that woman called the cops on a pair of white girls for simply existing before? The white girl who called the cops on a black girl for falling asleep in the common area of their dorm at Yale. Do you think she ever called the cops on one of her white peers? I get you're trying to be logical and looking at things at face value but at some point common sense has to seep in there somewhere. Why do you insist on talking instead of listening?
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,533
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 16, 2018 19:31:25 GMT -5
I don't know why we're getting bogged down in the details of the Starbucks incident anyway. There are numerous examples to prove the point, including the recent real estate investor who was checking out his work property and had a white lady call police on him. There was the white man this morning who cussed at a worker in a coffee shop for speaking Spanish to a customer and threatened to call ICE.
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 16, 2018 19:34:32 GMT -5
Could be because there's higher rates of poverty among blacks. But poverty doesn't excuse crime (though it may explain it), nor does it change the data. Just as men being more likely to be convicted of crimes for a reason. Because they commit more crime. 52% of people police kill are white, while 31% are black. But black people make up less then 31% of the population. And, white people make up more than 52% of the population. But black people make up far higher than 13% of crime, don't they? Kind of what I was saying. Just assuming their actions were racist doesn't quite work. I've went to the restroom without a purchase once a week at my Starbucks. And I'm not white (not fully anyway). I do agree that the bias regarding clothing is sometimes there, but for some, it isn't. Like for me, clothing goes a lot into first impressions. If you're wearing cheap clothes, regardless of race, I assume you're poor. Won't judge someone for it though, it's just my personal observation. Not trying to sound racist, though you could argue the gang culture that unfortunately plagues the black community is part of that (gang members tend to be from impoverished homes and people who lack acceptance from other groups). And no, I'm not saying blacks are the only ways to take part in this, or that most of black people do, it's just the most visible. Racism doesn't have to be on purpose, but it does have to have racial reasons behind it. And racism tends to be learned and deliberate, not inherent. Though ignorance could be a part of racism (as is the case in racially homogenous populations a lot of the time). So we agree that racism doesn't have to be on purpose. Not sure what you mean by racial reasons though. I mean, for me, I don't consider myself racist and do try to do what I can to avoid that - much of which comes from educating myself when and where I can and listening to other people. I'd be lying if I said I didn't make assumptions about people based on race, as much as I try to avoid it or quickly backtrack to myself, the fact of the matter is, the thought was there and it was something I couldn't help. I'm not saying it's something I or anyone else is born with. It's definitely taught, and not necessarily by parents or family. Much of it is taught through culture and exposure from entertainment and our surroundings. News, movies, history, etc. You say you're a visible minority and that you've never felt discriminated against or any sort of racism toward you. That's amazing. You're definitely very lucky to have that, whether you realize it or not, or even if you want to admit it. I think the thing you're failing to do in this and every discussion like this is listen. You're taking your experience as a visible minority and applying it to every other visible minority, basically telling them they're wrong. The men who were arrested for literally standing in a Starbucks for 2 minutes would have been arrested if they were white? The white mother who called the cops on two Native American teenagers because their very presence made her nervous. Do you think that woman called the cops on a pair of white girls for simply existing before? The white girl who called the cops on a black girl for falling asleep in the common area of their dorm at Yale. Do you think she ever called the cops on one of her white peers? I get you're trying to be logical and looking at things at face value but at some point common sense has to seep in there somewhere. Why do you insist on talking instead of listening? And you have black people beat up a white guy while calling him a "cracker". Don't see much a point with that. According to national crime statistics (and CNN), anti-white hate crime increased by 17% in 2016 (the other notable increase being Muslims). You bring up the Starbucks point despite you saying prior it didn't have to necessarily be racism. Also, couldn't there be a media bias? I don't have any stats, but the shooting of Daniel Weaver by police seemed far less visible than the shooting of Philando Castile. I could be wrong, but some stories are more reported on than others. And with the Starbucks story, if it was white people, it wouldn't have been news. No one would have thought it was racist or even controversial. While you do say my experience doesn't dictate what everyone goes through, and you're right - couldn't I say the same of everyone else? Especially in the identity politic/victimhood culture a lot of people have taken on? And not just blacks. Whites, gay people, straight people, pretty much everybody, seems to try the exaggerate the victimhood of the group they are part of. Especially when their experiences are more alike than different. To add to what I said earlier, I'd say class matters more than any other characteristic these days. Be it sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, gender. At least in the more egalitarian societies. And ignoring the pleas of others who go through the exact same experience for no reason but their skin colour or gender is not exactly the best way to go about it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2018 19:37:59 GMT -5
Oh my god
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,533
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 16, 2018 22:40:00 GMT -5
Naos How do you view things like Michael Williams’ deportation bus and Trump’s “animals” comment from today?
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 17, 2018 0:39:56 GMT -5
Naos How do you view things like Michael Williams’ deportation bus and Trump’s “animals” comment from today? I find them to be asinine. Why? I'm anti-SJW, not conservative. I rarely agree with Republican policies. I'm pretty far on the left when it comes to American politics.
|
|
YourFaveIsAFlop
5x Platinum Member
Catch me in the fridge, right where the ice be
Joined: April 2014
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by YourFaveIsAFlop on May 17, 2018 3:46:14 GMT -5
Wait are you American? Because you use non American spellings of things like favorite and color
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 17, 2018 5:19:14 GMT -5
Why is my nationality relevant?
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,533
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 17, 2018 10:31:01 GMT -5
|
|
Linnethia Monique
Diamond Member
Still 100% Snackable
🗣 NOW GET YOUR BOOTS AND YOUR COAT FOR THIS...
Joined: December 2004
Posts: 24,208
|
Post by Linnethia Monique on May 17, 2018 10:44:05 GMT -5
Why is my nationality relevant? Because absence of experience due to where you're from could help people see why you have the viewpoint that you do.
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 17, 2018 13:28:38 GMT -5
That isn't "racial profiling". When you get someone returning stolen goods, and you don't know their identity, you have to go after looks to ascertain who it is. When police ask witnesses what a suspect looks like, and they identify as him as black, is it racist? Of course it isn't. The business had a picture of the man who was returning stolen goods. And apparently, he looked similar. The person who was mistaken for this man had an expired ID. He also didn't have a driver's license despite driving there. If race wasn't mentioned in the article, would you assume racism? I do love how the author admits a heavy bias towards the store. For both their politics and saying it "feels racist". What's next? Walmart feels racist? KFC feels racist? www.wvtm13.com/article/man-claims-racial-discrimination-after-police-encounter-while-trying-to-make-return-at-hobby-lobby/20712620Also, what's up with the constant strawmans? Anti-white hate crime has actually increased in the past few years. So I basically said outright that racism does exist. I pointed out it was a small minority of people and everyone's not out to get you. Unless you follow the Avenue Q philosophy of "Everyone's a Little Bit Racist". Why is my nationality relevant? Because absence of experience due to where you're from could help people see why you have the viewpoint that you do. Countries who use the European English have significant minority populations, like Canada and the United Kingdom. So... My spelling doesn't necessarily indicate an "absence of experience".
|
|
YourFaveIsAFlop
5x Platinum Member
Catch me in the fridge, right where the ice be
Joined: April 2014
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by YourFaveIsAFlop on May 17, 2018 14:09:27 GMT -5
Because absence of experience due to where you're from could help people see why you have the viewpoint that you do. Countries who use the European English have significant minority populations, like Canada and the United Kingdom. So... My spelling doesn't necessarily indicate an "absence of experience". So I'll take that as a no
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 17, 2018 14:32:00 GMT -5
I choose to keep my nationality hidden. Because I don't see the point. What is being said here implies that my views could only arise from ignorance... Which is asinine.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,533
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 17, 2018 14:32:14 GMT -5
Also, what's up with the constant strawmans? I don't see how it's a straw man. I am addressing you saying racists are a very small group, which is a position you have stated you hold. It would be straw man if I was addressing an opinion you did not hold. You could say a singular/random example by me is creating a false dilemma, making a hasty generalization, or is a causal fallacy, but it's not straw man here. Having said that when something similar happens over and over it makes a pattern, and there is meaning in the pattern. My point is there are numerous recent examples of black people doing normal, legal things yet being berated for it and even having police called on them. Can I say that every single example was an act of discrimination? No. But are there enough examples that a pattern has been created we need to look at? Yes. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire. My point is to show how many potentially racist acts are happening on a daily basis, which is meant to show these things aren't something just a small group of people do. That pattern of reporting black people for living their lives also doesn't even begin to get into attitudes toward Black Lives Matter, welfare (though the example of the man in the coffee shop yesterday does), drugs, and on and on. Do I think class plays a role, too? Yes. Does it explain everything, though? No. Getting back to definitions, I don't know if everyone's a little "racist," but I do think everyone's a little bit prejudiced.
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 17, 2018 14:44:24 GMT -5
I never said racism "barely exists" though. Like the alt-right, they are a small minority that doesn't have much in the way of power. It doesn't mean they don't exist. Hate crimes has actually increased for two years straight in 2016 and 2017. As I said before, the biggest increases went towards Muslims and whites. People need to stop acting like they're chattel slaves in America in the 1800s though. Or hell, they don't even have it anywhere near as bad as before the Civil Rights Movement. Unlike then, that behaviour isn't really tolerated by society. Nor should it be. Class explains most, and you'll see that a rich black man is closer to a rich white man than he is to black people who live in the projects.
"Potentially racist" doesn't mean it is. And honestly, I'd rather not get into Black Lives Matter. I dislike them not for their principles, but for other reasons (though their anti-police ideology is something I don't really care for), and let's leave it at that.
|
|
YourFaveIsAFlop
5x Platinum Member
Catch me in the fridge, right where the ice be
Joined: April 2014
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by YourFaveIsAFlop on May 17, 2018 15:59:21 GMT -5
So when a Yale educated Harvard professor is arrested on his own front porch for trying to get his own door open, how does his class make up for his blackness?
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,533
|
Post by jenglisbe on May 17, 2018 16:13:06 GMT -5
So when a Yale educated Harvard professor is arrested on his own front porch for trying to get his own door open, how does his class make up for his blackness? And when these young white males shooting up places are carried out alive and well by police, how is their whiteness not helping them?
|
|
Linnethia Monique
Diamond Member
Still 100% Snackable
🗣 NOW GET YOUR BOOTS AND YOUR COAT FOR THIS...
Joined: December 2004
Posts: 24,208
|
Post by Linnethia Monique on May 17, 2018 16:22:07 GMT -5
So when a Yale educated Harvard professor is arrested on his own front porch for trying to get his own door open, how does his class make up for his blackness? And when these young white males shooting up places are carried out alive and well by police, how is their whiteness not helping them? Go off you two!
|
|
|
Post by Naos on May 17, 2018 17:13:17 GMT -5
So when a Yale educated Harvard professor is arrested on his own front porch for trying to get his own door open, how does his class make up for his blackness? And when these young white males shooting up places are carried out alive and well by police, how is their whiteness not helping them? Except... You haven't proven that's because of racial bias. The media also has an agenda. Prove to me it's because of race. Correlation does not imply causation. Whitness didn't help Daniel Shaver. Or the rise of anti-white hate crimes.
|
|