Everyone experiences RACISM.

[Persol]

So if you said people lie, but claim that you're not arguing that the black man complaining of racism is lying, what's left?

Too much pot this week or something? My statement about 'people lie' had nothing to do with color. You stated that I didn't trust him because he was a 'black man'. I raised the point because he is human. Yet, you seem to think I said something else... but are unable to find it. Perhaps that's because I didn't say it? Good job dumbass.

You still seem to be jumping through hoops in some hope to show that your outburst was warranted. You've resorted to interpreting (incorrectly) more than what I actually wrote. It's a pretty pathetic attempt really.

In Japan there is alot of apparent "racism" simply because the local people are not very used to foreigners.

I actually found them to be more poilte than people in the US... but I don't know Japanese and don't really know how they act when we weren't around. (We were also customers who didn't travel much without escort, so that may have helped),

 

[Tiassa]

Inherent

Too much pot this week or something? My statement about 'people lie' had nothing to do with color. You stated that I didn't trust him because he was a 'black man'. I raised the point because he is human. Yet, you seem to think I said something else... but are unable to find it.

Oh, come now, Persol ... oh, wait. That's right, we don't expect better of you.

Don't try to duck out of an inherent condition of what you wrote. Try it syllogistically:

• Persol says people lie
• Persol does not say a black man complaining of racism is lying
• Therefore a in Persol's argument a black man complaining of racism is not a person
​

Absurd? Indeed. Like I said, perhaps you ought to pay closer attention.

You still seem to be jumping through hoops in some hope to show that your outburst was warranted.

Hardly. I think your rudeness pretty much covers it.

You've resorted to interpreting (incorrectly) more than what I actually wrote.

I've focused on a specific result of what you wrote.

It's a pretty pathetic attempt really.

Coming from you, that means squat. Perhaps if you'd bothered to bring some integrity to this discussion, it might mean more.

I am, however, curious about one thing: Why did you choose this argument? The argument you chose to have is fluff compared to the other ideas that were brewing in this topic. It seems especially nonsensical insofar as you invoked imaginary "friends" to make a sleazy counterpoint. Seriously, what are you on? About? On ... about. Whatever.

 

[Persol]

• Persol says people lie

Saying that 'people lie' does not mean they do this all the time... just like saying 'people eat' doesn't mean you are currently eating.

• Persol does not say a black man complaining of racism is lying

What i actually said was "People lie when they do something stupid. It doesn't matter what color they are." Nice try though.

• Therefore a in Persol's argument a black man complaining of racism is not a
person

Logic anyone? I said that it was possible he was lying, but that it had nothing to do with him being black. You then attempted to distort that into the above.

I am, however, curious about one thing: Why did you choose this argument?

Because I wanted to. I wasn't aware that we should all ask for your permission before speaking (or typing in this case).

It seems especially nonsensical insofar as you invoked imaginary "friends" to make a sleazy counterpoint.

Lol, nice try.


So jackass, do you actually care to support how my 'argument' agrees with your above bulleted list... cause you've distorted what was actually said (considering I said the exact opposite).

So, in summary:
if you disagree with Tiassa about racism that makes you a racist
if Tiassa is unable to support the previous claim he will just lie about what you said

 

[SKULLZ]

People think im racist just by looking at me,not in what i say or do but just looking,in fact they probably think alot of things.

I think visual discrimination is worse cos no one is interested,some black guy will get a job easier than i would,in fact some guy in a wheelchair with an IQ below 70 would get the job while they tell me to piss off.

If i wanted a job in mcdonalds or burger king they would tell me to piss off cos i got a tattoo on my neck/hand.

Its a stupid reason not to employ someone,yeah yeah ok its my fault.....
although lets pause right there,i was forced to say that like i done something shamefully illegal in getting a tattoo,my fault?
well yes but if you look the word up in the dictionary:

fault:
n
a:A character weakness, especially a minor one.
b:Something that impairs or detracts from physical perfection
c:A mistake; an error
d:A minor offense or misdeed.

Well excuse fucking me,BY DEFINITION that is not my fault is it!

But then,none of what i said there matters much cos employers will not employ certain people with disfigured faces,and they may have been born that way.

I think the most offensive thing you can EVER do to a person is preventing them or restricting them from being able to make a living and put food on thier table,anything else is,well just words at the end of the day.

 

[Tiassa]

Saying that 'people lie' does not mean they do this all the time... just like saying 'people eat' doesn't mean you are currently eating . . . .

. . . . What i actually said was "People lie when they do something stupid. It doesn't matter what color they are." Nice try though.

There are a number of issues:

Let's go back to where we started for a moment: You ignored a broader point more relevant to the topic in order to pick the issue of whether or not my friend's experience was really a matter of racism. On the one hand, it doesn't matter if it's my friend or Malice Green or Mario Paz or Patrick Dorismond. In fact, the diversity of considerations only reinforces the larger point that you ignored: the costs of racism.

So how did you come to assert that, "People lie when they do something stupid"? Well, first you chose to pick an insignificant point, blow it up into an issue of dishonesty on one part and myopia on the other, and then backing away from that position opened up that stupid can of worms.

You noted that "People lie when they do something stupid," which seems the basis for your dismissal, "So your friend says." Really, Persol, I don't know about you or your friends, but with the plethora of race-politik arguments going out there, I chose that one because I can be beyond simply reasonably certain of the issues. That you neither trust me to not waste an insignificant point with a Rodney King style question or an outright falsehood is your own presumption and rather useless. Presuming that this black man speaking to me of racism is lying because people lie when they do something stupid is your own choice to mistrust the world around you.

Of course, instead of acknowledging that "the black man complaining of racism is lying" falls within your broadly-defined boundaries, you chose to accuse that condition as an invention of mine, rather than focus on a consequence of your expressed principle. And remember, the whole time there hangs in the background your "equivalent" example, which rudely overlooked the details of the incident in question. You still haven't explained to me how someone yelling at a cop is the same as not even having time to say a word.

Your continued retreat from your own rhetorical position suggests that you are aware that you are carrying out an intellectually-dishonest argument, and your attempts to divorce yourself from the consequences of your words by saying, "I never said that, this is what I meant," merely indicates that perhaps next time you ought to think through the implications of your chosen route.

If you don't like dumb rhetoric, don't invite it. And if you're going to come into this forum and call me a jackass, you'd better have a good reason for it. And you don't Persol: you have an unethical, dishonest argument. You need not ask my permission, although your petulant attitude does you no favors. Rather, congratulations, you've now demonstrated how far you'll go to undermine the idea that racism exists in the culture all with the effect of sidetracking a possible discussion of the costs of racism and the devices leading to those costs. You've picked up the most pinheaded aspect of the discussion you could find in order to make an issue out of it. And your issue is based on intellectually-dishonest presuppositions. Maybe if you'd taken two seconds to try to tie in what you chose to argue about with the rest of the post it was presented with, you would have seen the fruitlessness of accusing my friend of lying and accusing me of such idiocy as to select a case unsuitable for the purpose served by providing a contextual example.

So, Persol, instead of slinging names, why don't you try getting an argument and stop demanding more information. You've been discourteous throughout, and if you can't even be so decent as to fill in minor details to clarify the seemingly-incomparable comparisons you raise in order to discredit two people in your quest to pretend racism isn't taking place, then, and I mean this seriously--don't bother.

"Oh, wait--this is what I'm saying."
"No, I mean this is what I'm saying."
"I wasn't aware I needed permission to make a point."
"But this is what I was saying!"
​

You want to be a punk, go elsewhere. Period.

 

[Persol]

try getting an argument and stop demanding more information

I wasn't aware that an argument was required until you decided to start one. Thanks for providing that which you seem to think I need. As for 'demanding more information', you seem to be imagining things again.

The funny thing is that my point still stands. The original point was and still is "He however wasn't raised to consider himself a minority. He just blames it on the jack-ass cop." At this point you took it upon yourself to take offense. I don't know your friend, and I really could care less if he lied or not. My original point wasn't that lied. It was that just because he said it was racism doesn't mean it actually was. And yes, one of the possibilities is that he lied. I'm sorry to notify you of the fact that even your friends are capable of that.

Does that mean he lied, no.... but I (and frankly you as well) have no clue if he was completely truthful. My continued "this is what I'm saying" is only due to the fact that you continue to distort a very simple statement and take personal offense.

In case you actually forgot, the topic of this thread was "everyone experiences racism". A statement about the perception of racism is right on topic, regardless of how offended you decide to feel.

 

[wesmorris]

Technically, you'd think he probably wouldn't have lied, but perhaps rather jumped to a useless or incorrect conclusion? It's definately possible that he was correct, but Persol's point is valid as far as I'm concerned "he however wasn't raised ... ".

 

[Tiassa]

I wasn't aware that an argument was required until you decided to start one.

Such dishonesty: the point is that if you're going to go out of your way to be offensive, you might as well have a point.

As for 'demanding more information' , you seem to be imagining things again

Again, you are dishonest:

And I understand that you think the story of your friend was racism (and agree that it probably was)... but I've had similar things happen to white friends of mine. I had a friend ticketed because he didn't want the cop to push (read: ram repeatedly) his car out of the median instead of waiting for the tow truck which was already called.

This was what I asked for some detail on. Your comparison seems faulted from the outset: your friend yammering at a cop, my friend not even getting a word out, polite or otherwise.

So fill in the detail, please; I'd love to see this comparison. Because right now it doesn't seem quite straight.

You chose to provide two useless details: a mere assertion and a condition irrelevant to the question asked.

Yet you chose to single out another detail for response, and what a response you provided:

Tiassa: My friend got arrested without even being asked for license, insurance, or registration, for the "crime" of going through a yellow light in order to pull the car into a shopping-center parking lot before it stalled in the middle of the street.

Persol: So your friend says.

Instead of offering even the barest detail of what was going on, you chose to simply question the credibility of the story you chose to provide such an ill-fitting comparison for. As I noted, That was such a kind filling in of the detail.

From your earliest denials, I reminded you, Situationally, it's inherent given your comparison. You never really argued that point; rather, you passed it over entirely in order to note that:

People lie when they do something stupid. It doesn't matter what color they are.

The point was made to question the example you chose to argue against. The only way it is relevant is if you establish what that something stupid is. And at that point, the only thing you'd bothered to put on record was a "counterpoint" about arguing with a cop.

And you reiterated that point:

Tiassa: Given that you've got nothing but your own cynicism to stand on, Persol, one is given to wonder what your point is.

You have yet to provide any sense of detail, and your comparison reeks of presumptions upon which you insist despite what I tell you.

Persol: Saying that 'people lie' isn't cynicism... it's reality. People are more likely to lie when they do something that gets them in trouble. This isn't cynicism, but a simple observation.

So again, we're left with the presumption that the person in the example at hand must have done something and then lied about it.

Well, as I've reiterated in this topic, that's not the case. And all you've been able to put up is what works out to a convenient cycle.

1. "So your friend says." (e.g. Unreliable telling, a lie.)
2. People lie when they do something stupid.
3. Therefore black people claiming racism are lying?

a. Circumstances of example must include person doing something stupid.
b. I don't see it.
c. Perhaps Persol does, but we don't know because the what and how remain unestablished in favor of merely claiming discredit of the example.
d. What we're left with, then, is that this condition put before us in the example constitutes a lie, and we must reasonably presume, in order to not be completely arbitrary in this matter, that all similar circumstances alleged are lies.
e. Thus, Situationally, it is inherent in your argument that black people claiming racism are lying.

(1) This is easy enough to disarm: provide the device that constitutes "something stupid" or something that makes him "more likely to lie" because he has done "something that gets him into trouble".​

4. But since Persol insists that the above--3.e--is false, but only insists and does not make the case, we're left starting over that all of this is based on cynicism.​

And in all of that you've been reluctant to provide any substantial argument, merely pretending offense whenever I took the easy route and argued on your cynical level.

So I remind you, Persol, dishonesty is not an ethical argument; leave it elsewhere.

The funny thing is that my point still stands. The original point was and still is "He however wasn't raised to consider himself a minority. He just blames it on the jack-ass cop."

Actually, the funny thing is the dishonesty of that statement. And, actually, it's not all that funny.

First off, your "original point" is, as I have repeatedly noted, based on an ill-suited comparison. You have yet to establish the validity of the comparison upon which you assert your--(ahem!)--"original point". Secondly, that's your second point. Your first point was equally ill-suited: "And I can't say it was my black half that got me falsly arrested.... that doesn't mean it was a case of racism." Your point was no comparison at all, since you've given no detail whatsoever. I tried to reassure you that yes, in this case it was an issue of racism, but your cynicism simply would not allow you to move beyond the rather petty argument you chose to have, would it?

Because why on earth would you try to make the concession that it was probably racism, and then go on to claim to have had a white friend go through something "similar"? You provided an example that, even for its scant detail, was irrelevant except for your running presumption that the black man complaining of racism must necessarily be lying.

Had you provided an example that was actually "similar", I would have had no cause for offense and rather could have left you to wallow in your cynicism.

Yet you're left standing on a revised original point that still has no relevance to the example you chose for argument.

Come on, will it really kill you to be honest?

At this point you took it upon yourself to take offense. I don't know your friend, and I really could care less if he lied or not. My original point wasn't that lied. It was that just because he said it was racism doesn't mean it actually was. And yes, one of the possibilities is that he lied. I'm sorry to notify you of the fact that even your friends are capable of that.

And this is where you're just downright rude: Don't you think I already considered that?

Just maybe?

But no. Your cynicism won't allow that kind of trust, will it? So in order to explain yourself you call into question any black person claiming racism. Really, that's just classy, Persol. All of this for your cynicism?

In case you actually forgot, the topic of this thread was "everyone experiences racism". A statement about the perception of racism is right on topic, regardless of how offended you decide to feel.

Perhaps if you made an honest and substantial discussion of the perception of racism, I wouldn't find your dishonesty and lack of substance so offensive.

Really, you could have picked this issue with Wes: How does he know it's really, truly racism? Are we sure he's not mistaking some of the peripheral flak by extending the few true racists he knows to cover more people than they actually represent? What point would there be to questioning the integrity of such a premise?

You chose to take it up with me. You took the least important point in a post and made an issue about it; and I gotta admit, it's a pretty effective diversion. Racism doesn't cost anyone since it's all a lie, anyway? So we don't need to consider the costs of racism, do we?

Is your life so devoid of race-politik that you have no examples from your own experience to illustrate your point about perceptions of racism? Seriously, is your only way to advance your point to seek to divert dishonestly for the sake of egotistical cynicism?

Just because you claim to be recycling doesn't mean you're not squatting a biscuit on the lawn. And that everyone must defecate now and then simply does not suggest that you should not keep it to your own lawn.

If it means that much to you, why can't you be honest about it? And yes, I really do think you're being deliberate about this; no, I don't see an accident of circumstance in our disagreement.

 

[Stokes Pennwalt]

My wife's Colombian but was born in the US shortly after her parents immigrated. First time I met her family, I thought I'd killed their dog or something. Me being the typical white anglo-saxon dude.

Yes, everyone experiences racism. I think it's more or less proportional with how homogeneous your local culture is, supposing a good portion of it is 1st or 2nd generation.

 

[Persol]

Again, you are dishonest

Don't play the dumbass. I was never 'demanding more information' as you claim, and your quote doesn't show that. Don't accuse me of things which are just blatantly false.

So again, we're left with the presumption that the person in the example at hand must have done something and then lied about it

Once again you jump the gun. Noting a possibility does not make it fact and does not mean the 'must have done something'.

dishonesty is not an ethical argument; leave it elsewhere.

So, are you ever going to actually get around to showing this dishonesty?

I tried to reassure you that yes, in this case it was an issue of racism

Yes, you tried... but can't actually do that becase
a) you weren't there
b) you have no idea what the cops motivation actually was

You can only guess... and are upset that your judgement has been questioned.

Really, you could have picked this issue with Wes: How does he know it's really, truly racism?

Tiassa, I wasn't 'picking an issue' with anyone. Wesmorris realizes that this applies to him just as much.

You chose to take it up with me.

I chose to make a point. You chose to lie an assume things I didn't say.

 

[Tiassa]

Don't play the dumbass. I was never 'demanding more information' as you claim, and your quote doesn't show that. Don't accuse me of things which are just blatantly false.

Liar:

So jackass, do you actually care to support how my 'argument' agrees with your above bulleted list... cause you've distorted what was actually said (considering I said the exact opposite).

Perhaps you should have gotten rid of that part of your post, as well.

Would it kill you to be honest, Persol? I mean, really, just tell us if it will.

Once again you jump the gun. Noting a possibility does not make it fact and does not mean the 'must have done something'.

Noting a possibility?

Given the discord of your example and your argument of, "So your friend says" (or did you forget that one? ), one must remember that the reason you're noting the possibility is merely to reinforce your early presumption. Remember, as I've noted throughout and you've failed to respond to, Situationally, it's inherent given your comparison.

So, are you ever going to actually get around to showing this dishonesty?

Well, if you ever got around to addressing those points on the table, I might have a better understanding of what confuses you. In the meantime, all we have to go by are your denials of what you've already said.

Yes, you tried... but can't actually do that becase
a) you weren't there
b) you have no idea what the cops motivation actually was

You can only guess... and are upset that your judgement has been questioned.

Actually, what I find so bothersome is that you let your cynicism lead you around on a leash.

Tiassa, I wasn't 'picking an issue' with anyone.

Whatever you say.

Remember why you chose this argument?

Because I wanted to.

(That one's right here, in case you think for some reason you didn't say that.)

And did you take the opportunity to make your motivations clear, so that others might understand why you chose such a minor point to make important?

I wasn't aware that we should all ask for your permission before speaking (or typing in this case).

You know, technically, I can make that happen. Generally, we trust people to not require fully-moderated discussions in which all posts are mod-approved before they are given over for general reading. In the meantime, one would think you know better than to bring such fluff.

I chose to make a point. You chose to lie an assume things I didn't say.

As I've said from the early-going, Persol, Situationally, it's inherent given your comparison.

Remember, your first counterpoint gave no details:

And I can't say it was my black half that got me falsly arrested.... that doesn't mean it was a case of racism.

I mean, that comparison, which constitutes the whole of your post, doesn't even have enough detail to apply for comparison. Of course, that's how you wanted to present yourself, isn't it? After all, since you took up that argument because you wanted to, what should we think of your approach?

As I noted then:

Frankly, I rather resent the implication of myopia, and the projection of your own experience as the firmest reality.

You simply chose to reassert yourself--

And I understand that you think the story of your friend was racism (and agree that it probably was)... but I've had similar things happen to white friends of mine. I had a friend ticketed because he didn't want the cop to push (read: ram repeatedly) his car out of the median instead of waiting for the tow truck which was already called.

He however wasn't raised to consider himself a minority. He just blames it on the jack-ass cop.

--by providing yet another incomparable comparison and reinforcing my point.

Why? Because you wanted to?

What, will it kill you to be honest?

You don't seem to understand that, knowing what I do about the situation, if I grant you your argument of doubt, the result is exactly what I have described: The black man complaining of racism is lying.

The idea that it takes a few tries to say clearly what you're trying to say? That wouldn't bother me, except at no point have you treated the issue you have chosen to argue (because you wanted to) honestly.

And now, faced with the results of your choices, you wish to divorce yourself from them.

That doesn't fly. If it's so hard for you to leave unethical arguments out of an ethics forum, reconsider the necessity of your choices.

You're rude, dishonest, and without a case. Until you can state yourself clearly without lying, there's not much about your argument I can sympathize with.

I just don't understand why dishonesty is such a popular expression of egocentrism. If you're going to go out of your way to pretend you're that important, ought you not put that energy toward something positive?

What is it about a claim of racism that is so alarming to you that you just can't let it sit in order to get on with more important things? What is it about the idea of racism that frightens you so badly that you'd rather just make excuses? Give us a hint, throw us a bone. Anything, please, with substance.

 

[Persol]

LMAO. So expecting you to attempt to support your lies is 'demanding information'. Now that's just funny.

You don't seem to understand that, knowing what I do about the situation, if I grant you your argument of doubt, the result is exactly what I have described: The black man complaining of racism is lying.

You can keep repeating it... but that doesn't make it true.

If you're going to go out of your way to pretend you're that important

Who said I'm pretending

 

[Tiassa]

So expecting you to attempt to support your lies is 'demanding information'. Now that's just funny.

What's even funnier is your inability to support yourself on that point. What's not funny is your refusal to make any reasonable explanation of yourself.

You can keep repeating it... but that doesn't make it true.

Why are you so disrespectful? Oh, that's right, because you want to be.

Thank you for showing the dangers of denial.

Who said I'm pretending

It's quite obvious, as you're not actually that important.

If it's important enough to bring up, Persol, then you ought to do so in an honest manner reflecting an ethical argument structure. Or, simply, as I said before, Anything, please, with substance.

 

[wesmorris]

So to interject...

Let's assume the cop was a racist.

What do you do to keep the cop from being a racist?

Can you stop it? He shouldn't have the power but he does. He should be fired but he probably won't be. It's probably impossible to prove it was racism. What can be done?

To me it seems like only two things are plausible, maybe someone has more.

1) Shun that behavior
2) Try to teach people that the behavior should be shunned

But if people reject the logic behind the justification of their choice... like for instance, the choice to be a piece of shit racist... what can be done? Ignore them? Fight them? Kill them? Imprison them?

Is it someone's right to be a piece of shit racist if they so choose, so long as they abide by the law about it?

 

[Tiassa]

Let's assume the cop was a racist.

What do you do to keep the cop from being a racist?

It's a hard question. But when someone takes certain oaths, such as those to uphold the law, they forfeit the right to be a piece of shit racist on the job.

If, for instance, my friend was the only time he'd done that, sure we could say it was an aberration. And maybe that would be his first strike. How many strikes does it take? Or do we have to wait until another Amadou Diallo lies dead?

It's like anything else: you have the right to believe it. You even have the right to say it. But you don't have the right to take it onto the job unless you're an employee of a white-supremacist organization or some such.

I suppose you could workshop them to death. Of course, 'tis true that one can be too smart to be a cop, so ....

Basically, my solution is that once you have evidence of an officer's racism, you can either workshop that officer (e.g. workplace sensitivity) or fire them (e.g. false arrests).

I wouldn't mind seeing the District Attorney prosecute racism in false arrests, but that's the problem: if you don't give cops greater leeway to screw up people's lives for no good reason, they won't do their jobs.

Seriously, in what other job can you kill or detain and remove someone for the wrong reasons and walk away unscathed?

But it is a tough question. I do realize it's too much to ask of people whose job it is to enforce law to actually do so, and that we ought to be satisfied with not being the guy arrested for the wrong reasons.

 

[wesmorris]

It's a hard question. But when someone takes certain oaths, such as those to uphold the law, they forfeit the right to be a piece of shit racist on the job.

Of course, but there is always the mandate to establish that they are a racist, which of course isn't necessarily easy.

If, for instance, my friend was the only time he'd done that, sure we could say it was an aberration. And maybe that would be his first strike. How many strikes does it take? Or do we have to wait until another Amadou Diallo lies dead?

One thing we can be sure of is that there will be more abuses because humans are the system. Subjectively, your friend's racist officer may well have thought he was doing his duty to society by getting gooks off the street. Certainly that's disgusting but all that can be done is to attempt to weed that shit out up front and prosecute it when it happens. Given the inherent difficulty to firmly establish "yes this fucker is a racist piece of shit", the problem is here to stay for a while at least, probably forever.

I often think it's racist to acknowledge racism at all. There are any number of assholes who justify their assholedness in any number of ways. I'd venture to say that everyone is an asshole who justifies his assholedness in a number of ways. One's existence leads one to subjectively reasonable assumptions about any topic. The path of least resistance dictates that it's simply too cumbersome to consider factors that we're unfamiliar with, or are beyond our experience and such. As a result, you get racist fucks whose mental apparatus 'least resists' them into 'if their skin looks like this, this behavior follows'. They then continually twist their stimulous to fit this assumption and that's it: racism.

Given that we can't control one's stimulous in any scientific sense, and we can't control people's thought process, racism and all other 'bad' isms are here to stay in one form or another. All we can do is attempt to hold them accountable for their actions as well as possible. What could be argued I suppose, is what is gained by strategic allocation of resources to combat or minimize this that or the other problematic area. As a straight guess I'd think it'd be nominal in the area of racism per se, since as I mentioned it's cumbersome to establish one's degree of racism to any degree of certainty. It's just simpler (and more efficient) in general to hold them accountable for their actions and not really consider racism as a factor unless the offense is obvious enough to stand a chance of proving it.

That all makes me wonder if it's not better to simply refuse to acknowledge racism. I don't mean, "pretend it doesn't exist", I mean "don't give it any credence" because doing so simply feeds the righteous indignation of the offender (since to them, it's obvious that if you're skin is this, you must be that). Of course serial racists (so to speak) make conviction doable and as such, acknowledging the issue in that context is sensible IMO.

It's like anything else: you have the right to believe it. You even have the right to say it. But you don't have the right to take it onto the job unless you're an employee of a white-supremacist organization or some such.

Did your friend report the guy?

I suppose you could workshop them to death.

Hmm... yeah that's pretty good I guess, but as you mention below. Well, I think I just wouldn't really want to be a cop.

Basically, my solution is that once you have evidence of an officer's racism, you can either workshop that officer (e.g. workplace sensitivity) or fire them (e.g. false arrests).

I'd go for prosecution under hate crimes maybe. That's a serious abuse of power, but at the same time it's not easy to get people to do the job.. so it's a tough spot. I suppose we're always going to be limited by the conflicting nature of the subjective human experience. Try to weed them out as best as possible, but as we're aware if a human decides to be deceptive along these lines, it can be very problematic to the overall system because it becomes pretty difficult to nail them on their offenses. They can do it subtly enough to keep themselves on the borderline. If you make the borders too short (as in, you arrest a black guy and you're gong down) the system fails. If they're too broad (arrest at your discretion), subjective agendas find breeding ground. No matter what you do, there will still be racist fucks, dirty cops, blah blah blah. Ah, the nature of integrated systems. Hehe.. the cop who says "nigger" in argentina causes a riot in LA? Damnit man, I find it both disgusting and beautiful, the complexity that arises from the interaction of our individual worlds.

I wouldn't mind seeing the District Attorney prosecute racism in false arrests, but that's the problem: if you don't give cops greater leeway to screw up people's lives for no good reason, they won't do their jobs.

Ultimately it's a self-balancing system. Stuff happens until a wheel squeeks, someone applies grease. Repeat. Sometimes the wheels squeek louder than others and on and on and on. I must admit that sometimes I get so caught up in observing the system that I forget to be a part of it.

Seriously, in what other job can you kill or detain and remove someone for the wrong reasons and walk away unscathed?

That depends on a number of circumstances, but you could do that as a human in any occupation. It's just easier in some than in others. It's also a dangerous, thankless tihng to be a cop... so...

But it is a tough question. I do realize it's too much to ask of people whose job it is to enforce law to actually do so, and that we ought to be satisfied with not being the guy arrested for the wrong reasons.

LOL. I think you have it wrong T. It's not at all too much to ask it of them, it's just wrong to think they'll do it in the manner you intend. Most of them will try to do their jobs to some extent, and each will interpret it all as only they can. Ultimately, people are not only prone to doing their own thing (outside of your expectation) but making mistakes in judgement, etc. Honestly we are quite lucky that we don't get arrested every other day by some rogue moron. It's a testament to the endeavor of millions over hundreds of years that we aren't. No, that doesn't make what happened to your friend right (assuming it was racism)... and he should have reported that bastard (though it's probably unlikely that he'd have gotten anywherhe with it). His feedback is actually essential to the checks and balances in the system. Maybe they wouldn't act on his case, but if enough people keep saying the same thing about that particular cop, then the likelihood of his removal or "death by workshop" would increase to some extent.

 

[Tiassa]

LOL. I think you have it wrong T. It's not at all too much to ask it of them, it's just wrong to think they'll do it in the manner you intend.

Yeah, there's a bit of bitterness in the way I was looking at it. In part I was frustrated with myself because I didn't think I wrote much of a post at all. And, strangely, some bad blood welling up as I recalled some infamous moments of law enforcement that still bug me.