Prejudice and Bigotry in Law Enforcement

[Seattle]

1) Black and Hispanic people are overwhelmingly the recipients of mistreatment and undue force from the police in America.
2) There are millions of white Americans who celebrate the Civil War, as if somehow they won after all. What they seem to want is the freedom to celebrate their history of being traitors to the American flag and the Union, as something to be proud of, and erect statues of people who were traitors and who turned their back on the Union, because they wanted to keep slaves.
3) America, through the vagaries of its electoral college which was instituted to allow slave-owning states more political power than they actually deserved or warranted, elected a white, privileged old man as their president, who is a racist asshole. Who lies with every breath, and who seems to think stoking racial tensions is good for him, because he doesn't give a shit about Americans or America.

So, no, given all that, America is not a racist country. But dude, almost every country has a problem with racism, some more than others. So the previous sentence is demonstrably untrue: America IS a racist country, and it's about time they bloody-well did something. One thing they could do, is stop hiring racist rednecks and giving them police uniforms.

The U.S. is one of the least racist countries. It's not realistic to believe that racism will ever be eliminated in its entirety. There is a point of diminishing returns, just like with unemployment or poverty or anything else.

You can continue to try to improve anything but to make it sound like it is a greater problem than it is is just disingenuous.

There aren't a lot of people being unjustly killed by the police. Poverty among some blacks isn't being caused largely because of racism. Most current policies designed to improve the lives of poor black people aren't doing anything positive. Another government handout isn't helping anyone just as it never has had that effect.

Racism isn't now the reason that anyone is poor. Individual actions are most of the difference between those who improve their lot and life and those who don't. It's got nothing to do with racism.

Other black groups who come to the U.S. prosper, other initially non-black groups prosper as well. Everyone wouldn't be trying to come to the U.S. if the current narrative about a racist American were true.

People who are encouraged to do something for themselves and who are held accountable for it, find that they lives improve. Those that encourage that what to see them succeed. Frequently they are called "racists" by those who whether they want to or not are keeping them right where they are.

Cops aren't the reason that some poor black people stay poor, nor is racism in America a substantial factor. You are never going to have a society where no one ever utters some bigoted remark. As long as you have equality before the law, the results are what they are. That's largely determined by the individual.

That's why, economically as a group Jewish people and Asian people out perform most other groups including white. That's not racism. That's individualism. Not everyone actually is the same. Some work harder than others. That's OK too.

 

[Bells]

This concept that America is a "racist nation" is ridiculous as are your arguments about police actively going out to murder black children.

America is a racist nation from its first settlement of Europeans right through to today.

And I never said that police were actively going out to murder black children.

When you have to resort to outright lying to try to make a point, I'd advise you stop while your are that far behind.

I understand that your emotions have been fanned by the media and the "black leadership".

What emotions would that be, exactly?

You keep making dumbarse comments and when you are called out on it, you instantly refer to the other's emotions as a response. It's kind of pathetic.

What kind of positive results does black leadership have to show for their "work"?

Why don't you ask Obama?

Unless of course you would rather all of the work of black leaders in the past and present be wound back and you can get back to hanging 'the negro' from a tree in the front yard?

It's kind of like expecting a union leader to make a company so successful that people no longer want the union.

Of course. People like you have it all figured out! Keep them poor and know you maintain control.

If the narrative was to have policies that encourage entrepreneurship in the inner cities, once those areas improved the people would soon be voting Republican. That's not good for black leadership is it?

Would this be before or after these policies addressed systemic abuse and racism which saw minorities and black people kept out of having their own businesses or even renting or buying in "white neighbourhoods"?

That's not good for black leadership is it?

What isn't?

Meanwhile, black people are being harassed in their own homes and neighbourhoods, stalked and abused by white people who do not believe they belong there..

Tell me, is that good for white leadership?

Much better to keep talking about how racist America is. This has nothing to do with my "white privilege". I take care of myself and don't really rely on the government. I don't have "white privilege" if I apply to a university or if I apply for a government job. I certainly don't have it on here where anyone is free to call me a "white supremacist" or any other ignorant term. I avoid the police.

You do you!

How great is it to be you, huh? White male.. I mean, your arguments are basically proving my point.

If anyone would spend a tenth of the effort of getting everyone all riled up just to suggest that those in poverty have fewer kids, move away from high crime areas and get an education and start your own mom and pop businesses...these problems would go away in a generation.

I know right!

You get to have that option. It's great, isn't it?

We shall ignore for now your pining for the good old eugenics days of forced sterilisations of black women.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_and_birth_control#The_sterilization_movement

And focus more on your argument in a modern context..

Lack of access to birth control and abortion.. Laws that target black women and access to healthcare and reproductive healthcare..

https://time.com/5109797/black-women-dying-reproductive-health/
http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/publicrightsprivateconscience/2018/03/19/frombirthcontroltodeath/

Access to housing.. Systemic racism that prevents black people, minorities and Native Americans from moving into better and/or wealthier neighbourhoods..
https://www.americanprogress.org/is...nequality-displacement-exclusion-segregation/

Better education? How good is it to be white in America!?

https://uncf.org/pages/k-12-disparity-facts-and-stats

Mom and pop businesses?
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-06-20/black-owned-business-loans-banks
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/bu...lack-owned-small-businesses-shut-out-n1195291

I mean, I could go on, but what's the point? Your argument basically amounts to - black people should just be white.. While whining that white privilege doesn't exist.

Government isn't really the solution but a less diverse government would be helpful.

You think having less minorities in government would be helpful?

The party structure isn't doing anyone (other than party officials) any favors. A good idea by one party has to be opposed by the other party rather than working together for some reasonable compromise as would happen with a weaker party structure where the politicians have more individual authority.

A bit hard to work with a party who's leader and current President is a blithering moron and who spends his time retweeting "White Power" videos...

Of course your only interest is to raise the race flag.

Because this thread is attempting to address and discuss prejudice and bigotry in law enforcement..

I get it. You're upset because some uppity negroes are making you uncomfortable and because you live with your head firmly embedded inside your lower intestines and you appear to have no idea of what people who do not look like experience on a daily basis..

That's the only subject you have any reaction to and your only reaction is to call anyone not agreeing with you a racist.

That's interesting, given that you have historically posted in such a way as to literally out yourself as a racist. Case in point:

If an asian person who name was Phong Kim faced this problem what would happen? Would his name suddenly change to John Kim? If Shoquisha Jones is having a hard time getting into Harvard I'm sure she is smart enough to become Sherrie Jones. This isn't a real problem. Your white guilt is showing.

Your solution to racism is to just have minorities try to sound white with white sounding names..

It's not even racist dog whistling anymore.

You're out there howling into a megaphone.

 

[Seattle]

America is a racist nation from its first settlement of Europeans right through to today.

Your argument is that people are leaving (in droves) less racist countries to come to a more racist country? I question your wisdom regarding this point.

Unless of course you would rather all of the work of black leaders in the past and present be wound back and you can get back to hanging 'the negro' from a tree in the front yard?

You have a weak argument when you have to resort to these tactics.

Of course. People like you have it all figured out! Keep them poor and know you maintain control.

I'm not the one trying to keep them poor and under my control. Your policies have done that nicely.

Would this be before or after these policies addressed systemic abuse and racism which saw minorities and black people kept out of having their own businesses or even renting or buying in "white neighbourhoods"?

Black people had more mom and pop businesses before integration and two couple black marriages were no less than two couple white marriages until the late 60's as well. You're not looking very well informed here.

We shall ignore for now your pining for the good old eugenics days of forced sterilisations of black women.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_and_birth_control#The_sterilization_movement

That's just a dishonest comment on your part (what's new?). I wasn't arguing for sterilization. My point was to illustrate that we may not be able to completely undo the damage done to a child during the formative years that is done by being in such an environment but by the next generation much would be improved by my suggestions. I pointed out from the beginning that this wasn't a literal suggestion but rather just a means to illustrate that it might have to skip a generation.

You think having less minorities in government would be helpful?

A bit hard to work with a party who's leader and current President is a blithering moron and who spends his time retweeting "White Power" videos...

That was a typo on my part. I was talking about a less divisive government and not a less diverse government. You seem to understand that from your next comment.

You are demonstrating that when all you know to talk about is racism then you find racism everywhere. How is that working out for you? Let's keep in mind that you are the bigot here who is doing all of the name calling.

 

[Seattle]

Bells, don't let this be you one day...

 

[Bells]

Your argument is that people are leaving (in droves) less racist countries to come to a more racist country? I question your wisdom regarding this point.

How goes that wall to keep the brown people out going?

Classism and poverty are driving forces. Ask those people if they had a choice, or any other option, if they would still be risking their lives to come to the US.

You have a weak argument when you have to resort to these tactics.

What did you think you deserved when you tried to argue that America is not racist and racism is low, and that if non-white people want to get a job, they should just change their names to that of white people to try to hide their ethnicity from the white people who would not hire them because of their ethnicity... The fact that you try to push these arguments while denying racism shows just how ridiculous your arguments actually are.

I'm not the one trying to keep them poor and under my control. Your policies have done that nicely.

You are arguing for a continuation of policies that not only punish them, but keeps them where they are and prevent them from being able to move forward without fear...

You are pushing for maintaining your white privilege.

Black people had more mom and pop businesses before integration and two couple black marriages were no less than two couple white marriages until the late 60's as well. You're not looking very well informed here.

While ignoring the fact that segregation ensured they had no other choice.

They had businesses to cater to their segregated communities..

Do you think segregation was a better system?

That's just a dishonest comment on your part (what's new?). I wasn't arguing for sterilization.

Have less children - about a country that forced sterilisation on black women to stop them from having more children.. That was their choice historically.

You think I am not well informed? You make your arguments while completely ignoring history.

My point was to illustrate that we may not be able to completely undo the damage done to a child during the formative years that is done by being in such an environment but by the next generation much would be improved by my suggestions. I pointed out from the beginning that this wasn't a literal suggestion but rather just a means to illustrate that it might have to skip a generation.

You think racism will take one generation to overcome?

How naive are you?

The damage being done to those children is by the likes of people who argue that they should just change their names to white sounding names and who deny racism is an issue..

That was a typo on my part. I was talking about a less divisive government and not a less diverse government. You seem to understand that from your next comment.

You are demonstrating that when all you know to talk about is racism then you find racism everywhere. How is that working out for you? Let's keep in mind that you are the bigot here who is doing all of the name calling.

I call out racism when I see it.

And I'm seeing it in you.

 

[Seattle]

How goes that wall to keep the brown people out going?

Classism and poverty are driving forces. Ask those people if they had a choice, or any other option, if they would still be risking their lives to come to the US.

You aren't actually doing any thinking or discussing here. You are just arguing with yourself or having some idealized debate in your head.

I'm not for a wall and have no desire to keep brown people out (or any people out). You just threw that in as you are wont to do.

What did you think you deserved when you tried to argue that America is not racist and racism is low, and that if non-white people want to get a job, they should just change their names to that of white people to try to hide their ethnicity from the white people who would not hire them because of their ethnicity... The fact that you try to push these arguments while denying racism shows just how ridiculous your arguments actually are.

I didn't say there is no racism but racism is low. I said the U.S. wasn't a "racist country". Iran is a racist country if you are the wrong race as are many other countries. There is at least equality before the law in the U.S. and racism isn't the prime factor in the U.S. that determines whether one can do well or not.

You are arguing for a continuation of policies that not only punish them, but keeps them where they are and prevent them from being able to move forward without fear...

You are pushing for maintaining your white privilege.

You are pushing an agenda that isn't yours and that you haven't actually thought through. The best measure for a policy is whether its outcome is desirable and not whether the intentions behind it were good intentions.

There were generally good intentions behind the concept of a minimum wage. The intentions were to give the least advantaged a higher wage. The outcome of any artificial manipulations of price is to penalize the most disadvantaged.

That's not what happens though. Take inexperienced teenagers who have the fewest skills (no experience). If you can pay them only what the market will bear then you can pay them less while they learn on the job and develop marketable skills.

If black teenagers come from poor schools, have other negative factors going on at home, maybe they are late to work often, etc. then if the wage is artificially high the employer will just hire white middle class kids or if it's too high for that you will find college students being offered those jobs.

Good intentions with an unintended (but predictable) outcome. If someone wants to have a better outcome your only comment is to call someone a racist... and nothing changes.

While ignoring the fact that segregation ensured they had no other choice.

They had businesses to cater to their segregated communities..

Do you think segregation was a better system?

The intentions of segregation were not good. The effects on families, helping themselves, having businesses was a better outcome compared to a welfare state. The point isn't that segregation wasn't desirable.

It's interesting, ironic, and sad that there is now talk (or maybe it has happened) that there are enough black students at Yale that some black students want a black only dorm as a "safe space". Segregation has come full circle and that doesn't say much about black students wanting/needing a "safe space" at Yale.

Have less children - about a country that forced sterilisation on black women to stop them from having more children.. That was their choice historically.

You think I am not well informed? You make your arguments while completely ignoring history.

As time goes on, yes, it does seem that you are not well informed and more importantly you aren't actually showing any critical thought.

You are talking about sterilized black women while I'm talking about families having fewer children, having them after marriage and having no more than they can afford.

You might as well just be yelling "fire" in every conversation.

You think racism will take one generation to overcome?

How naive are you?

The damage being done to those children is by the likes of people who argue that they should just change their names to white sounding names and who deny racism is an issue..

I call out racism when I see it.

And I'm seeing it in you.

You are like the man who only knows how to use a hammer and thinks that every solution is a nail.

Racism isn't like smallpox. It's not something that will be eliminated as long as there are humans. It is already low. It's not the reason that some are now left behind. It hasn't been the reason since the late 60's. That it exists at any level isn't important to what we are discussing.

It does exist and will continue to exist. Crime will continue to exist but it too is historically low. Unemployment will continue to exist but it is low (before the virus).

Therefore what an individual does has a much great influence on how their life will turn out. The historical fact that black women were sometimes sterilized as a slave isn't the reason why some black women have so many kids out of wedlock with so many different men but that is the biggest factor keeping them from mirroring the results of most other groups.

If blacks as a group have less assets than whites as a group it isn't because they are discriminated against (even if they are discriminated against). Unemployment among all blacks is low (before the virus). If you have a lot of kids you aren't going to have a lot of financial assets. If you spend more than you make you aren't going to have a lot of financial assets.

These are the issues to address and not a level of racism that would be considered low in any country. Many black people have greatly improved their situation since the 60's. Those who haven't didn't do the same things as those that did therefore the biggest factors are non-racial.

That's the issue to focus on. White privilege, white guilt, systemic racism, that's all just a narrative that you've bought into that isn't helping you or any other thinking person.

One thing I hear over and over again is that when someone grew up in a "ghetto" and then went to college or ended up being exposed to more average white people for the first time they are often surprised to learn/see/realize that white people don't "hate" them, don't care that they are black and are nice to them as most all people are to each other. They often admit that they grew up "hating" whites until they actually met one. It's not that I have "white privilege" and want to protect it. I don't care about the silliness that you are describing. You think I have something that I don't have to "protect".

Everyone doesn't have to be devoid of racism. Everyone doesn't have to be "nice". Everything doesn't have to be perfect. It's not perfect for me or anyone else. No other group around the world is talking about slavery reparations and using slavery as an excuse for any poor performance as compared to some other group. At one time or another in history all nations were involved in slavery. Large numbers of whites were actually slaves between the 1400's and the 1700's. It's time to get over it. No need to forget it but it's not currently affecting anyone else's lives so it's time for everyone to focus on real current problems and most problems are individual problems.

How can people not value education, have way too many kids and then blame the outcome on "racism"? No one could make those poor decisions and have any other outcome.

That's the toxic narrative that is currently running through the liberal/left side of the spectrum. It's starting to change because the very people that were the most empathetic to "racism" against blacks are now realizing that enough is enough.

We weren't racist but we were willing to try to understand what others have gone though and now it's to the point that every problem is because of petty "micro-agressions", "white privilege", "systemic racism" and it's just ridiculous at this point. Jessie Jackson and those kinds of vested interests are fanning the flames to keep their base. No one is being helped especially the poor black communities that this is supposed to be all about.

Let's have a riot so that blacks can burn down their own businesses. Great. That was brilliant.

At a certain point when you have welfare, affirmative action, equality before the law, the ability to call anyone racist that you feel like with no repercussions, it's insane to keep repeating "white privilege" like a zombie and it's time to figure out how to address the real individual problems keeping some portion of the community from advancing like everyone else with similar backgrounds.

 

[iceaura]

Cops aren't the reason that some poor black people stay poor, nor is racism in America a substantial factor

Nonsense.
Many black people have been economically ruined by the abuse inflicted on them, their families, their friends, and their neighborhoods, at the hands of the police.
Racism, meanwhile (of which the abuse by police is merely one manifestation), is and has been for generations now the single most substantial factor in the impoverishment of black people in the US - nothing else comes close.

One thing I hear over and over again is that when someone grew up in a "ghetto" and then went to college or ended up being exposed to more average white people for the first time they are often surprised to learn/see/realize that white people don't "hate" them, don't care that they are black and are nice to them as most all people are to each other.

The only people I have ever seen claim that racism was "hatred", that those who did not hate were not racist, that not hating black people meant racism was not involved, and so forth, were US white racial bigots.

As soon as some American guy starts blithering about "hatred", the rest of us - US natives, familiar with the scene - know what we're dealing with.

 

[Seattle]

Nonsense.
Many black people have been economically ruined by the abuse inflicted on them, their families, their friends, and their neighborhoods, at the hands of the police.
Racism, meanwhile (of which the abuse by police is merely one manifestation), is and has been for generations now the single most substantial factor in the impoverishment of black people in the US - nothing else comes close.

That's simply not true.

The only people I have ever seen claim that racism was "hatred", that those who did not hate were not racist, that not hating black people meant racism was not involved, and so forth, were US white racial bigots.

As soon as some American guy starts blithering about "hatred", the rest of us - US natives, familiar with the scene - know what we're dealing with.

More nonsense.

 

[Bells]

You aren't actually doing any thinking or discussing here. You are just arguing with yourself or having some idealized debate in your head.

I'm not for a wall and have no desire to keep brown people out (or any people out). You just threw that in as you are wont to do.

You are correct. I apologise.

Based on your argument, you just want black people to simply be more white.

I didn't say there is no racism but racism is low. I said the U.S. wasn't a "racist country". Iran is a racist country if you are the wrong race as are many other countries. There is at least equality before the law in the U.S. and racism isn't the prime factor in the U.S. that determines whether one can do well or not.

How you can actually say this or believe this and think you should be taken seriously is beyond me.

https://time.com/5545685/white-supremacist-propaganda-surge-adl/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46189391
Your entire country was founded on racist principles and doctrines, that diminished the value and rights of Native Americans, and then slavery and all the rest that followed. Australia is no better. I would never suggest that Australia is not a racist country. Because it very much is.

Denying its existence and denying it was bad enough to be problematic is why it will never stop or be resolved. You don't seem to understand what systemic racism actually means or how it affects other people who are not white. That inherent and intrinsic bias and how it affects one's day to day life and choices and options and in the US, how police perceive and respond to people who are not white.

You think there is equality before the law in the US? Prove it! Because your claim is extraordinary.

All evidence points directly to extreme inequality "before the law": https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

Be it from policing (over policing) right through the entire process to sentencing.

And despite all evidence to the contrary, you are still going to argue that one's skin colour is not going to affect their progress and/or financial progress in the US? Where have you been? Blind? Have you been living in a cave for generations?

You are pushing an agenda that isn't yours and that you haven't actually thought through. The best measure for a policy is whether its outcome is desirable and not whether the intentions behind it were good intentions.

There were generally good intentions behind the concept of a minimum wage. The intentions were to give the least advantaged a higher wage. The outcome of any artificial manipulations of price is to penalize the most disadvantaged.

That's not what happens though. Take inexperienced teenagers who have the fewest skills (no experience). If you can pay them only what the market will bear then you can pay them less while they learn on the job and develop marketable skills.

If black teenagers come from poor schools, have other negative factors going on at home, maybe they are late to work often, etc. then if the wage is artificially high the employer will just hire white middle class kids or if it's too high for that you will find college students being offered those jobs.

Good intentions with an unintended (but predictable) outcome. If someone wants to have a better outcome your only comment is to call someone a racist... and nothing changes.

Throwing money by way of a better minimum wage, for example, or even a higher wage, will not fix the issue of racial inequality.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-f...ional-inequality-affect-economic-opportunity/

If you fail to address racial inequality, economic inequality will persist and black Americans will continue to fall further behind.

The intentions of segregation were not good. The effects on families, helping themselves, having businesses was a better outcome compared to a welfare state. The point isn't that segregation wasn't desirable.

Please stop talking crap and do some actual research.

https://www.americanprogress.org/is...nequality-displacement-exclusion-segregation/

It's interesting, ironic, and sad that there is now talk (or maybe it has happened) that there are enough black students at Yale that some black students want a black only dorm as a "safe space". Segregation has come full circle and that doesn't say much about black students wanting/needing a "safe space" at Yale.

You should ask yourself why such spaces are now so necessary. And then question why you think racism is so low in the US now.

As time goes on, yes, it does seem that you are not well informed and more importantly you aren't actually showing any critical thought.

You are talking about sterilized black women while I'm talking about families having fewer children, having them after marriage and having no more than they can afford.

You might as well just be yelling "fire" in every conversation.

Again, you started talking about their having less children, while forgetting the historical context of such a statement in the US.

Racism isn't like smallpox. It's not something that will be eliminated as long as there are humans. It is already low. It's not the reason that some are now left behind. It hasn't been the reason since the late 60's. That it exists at any level isn't important to what we are discussing.

Racism is learned behaviour.

Your racist ideology was learned and it is a choice.

Therefore what an individual does has a much great influence on how their life will turn out. The historical fact that black women were sometimes sterilized as a slave isn't the reason why some black women have so many kids out of wedlock with so many different men but that is the biggest factor keeping them from mirroring the results of most other groups.

As slaves?

Dude! In the 1970's, doctors were sterilising black, Native American and minority women when they had to have surgery for something else entirely and it was done without the knowledge or consent of those women. Forced and coerced sterilisation is still happening to this day and black and minority women are even more victimised by it. You think it's something that just happened in slavery? https://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/book-excerpts/health-article/forced-sterilization/

And women have more children "out of wedlock" (seriously?!) because they are denied the right and ability to access adequate reproductive healthcare - and are often forced to resort to inadequate and ineffective birth control as a result.

Did you not bother to read any of the links provided?

If blacks as a group have less assets than whites as a group it isn't because they are discriminated against (even if they are discriminated against). Unemployment among all blacks is low (before the virus). If you have a lot of kids you aren't going to have a lot of financial assets. If you spend more than you make you aren't going to have a lot of financial assets.

Please, for the love of all that is holy, look up the words "systemic racism" and "systemic bigotry"and "structural racism".

And then you might have some idea of what is being discussed here.

At a certain point when you have welfare, affirmative action, equality before the law, the ability to call anyone racist that you feel like with no repercussions, it's insane to keep repeating "white privilege" like a zombie and it's time to figure out how to address the real individual problems keeping some portion of the community from advancing like everyone else with similar backgrounds.

I think it's more insane to ignore reality and deny what's happening around you.

Ignorance, like racism, is a choice. Although for you it's not ignorance. It's pure unadulterated racism that sees you deny the reality of non-whites in America. I ignored the rest of what you posted because it's utter shite. It is clear that you are not willing to even back up any of your claims, nor have you read any of the links provided that shows just how wrong you are.

You want to address inequality? Then you need to address the root cause of that inequality. You can pay blacks the same as white people, but they will still be poorer because they will never be given the same opportunities and options that white people have. And that is the reality for black Americans. Something you will never experience.

Just as a white person, you will have less chance of being shot if pulled over for a traffic stop by the police, compared to a black person - who will be racially profiled and the risk of his dying during even a routine traffic stop increases dramatically because of bias and racism and how it shapes the attitude of police officers when dealing with African Americans and other minorities. It's why black people keep being murdered by police, be they on or off duty.

 

[parmalee]

You are correct. I apologise.

Based on your argument, you just want black people to simply be more white.

I've actually soured on comedy somewhat of late. I appreciate the satire still, I just find it harder and harder to laugh. Someone claiming an absence of racism while proffering the "why can't 'they' just act like white people" argument? This is beyond fucked up.

I once had a highly unusual seizure that slightly resembled a tonic clonic, only it lasted for hours and I was mostly conscious. It took my friend two hours just to get me out of the house and into a car, to get to the ER. At some point involuntary respiration failed and I had to be put of a respirator for a bit. A nurse told me to stop "thrashing around," so that she could get it onto my face. That was funny. Not so much at the time, but in retrospect.

But this shit? Is it deliberate, or have synapses slowed to point that somehow the irony simply remains wholly lost? And which--willful/stupid--is worse?

 

[sculptor]

and, now
a brief musical(?) interlude:

 

[iceaura]

Many black people have been economically ruined by the abuse inflicted on them, their families, their friends, and their neighborhoods, at the hands of the police.
Racism, meanwhile (of which the abuse by police is merely one manifestation), is and has been for generations now the single most substantial factor in the impoverishment of black people in the US - nothing else comes close.

That's simply not true.

? It is among the best documented and most obvious truths about US society and politics and financial structuring there is. It is quite possibly the best established fact of American politics and financial structure.

If you really can't see something that obvious, that overt, that large and flagrant and frequently demonstrated in front of your face, then there is no hope for you - as I have long recommended to liberals and lefties dealing with American fascism, there is no point in addressing your fantasy world at all. No discussion is possible with people who simply deny physical reality when it conflicts with their presumptions.

If, on the other hand, you care to dig yourself out of that ridiculous hole, I can provide you with a reading list for starters - including intellectuals, researchers, economists, and reputable authors who have made themselves acceptable to "respectable" media by mouthing bothsides platitudes with the necessary frequency (such as Matt Taibbi).

The U.S. is one of the least racist countries

That would be very bad news.

Because the US is racist to its core, a very hard core. The US was and is built on a foundation of racial bigotry - from the bottom up, and including every single institution of government and financial organization from the local sheriff and housing code authority to the Executive Branch in the White House.

For example: Trump, the members of his family, and every single member of Trump's original cabinet (maybe not the Exxon guy), was an overtly, obviously, publicly, and thoroughly, documented racial bigot at the time of Trump's taking office. Are you trying to claim that having the entire Federal Executive Branch run by white supremacists (Mnuchin et al) and racial bigots (Trump, et al) is not a significant factor in the continuing impoverishment of black people in the US? That the racially segregated corporate wealth and racially bigoted financially powerful white men who organized and propaganda-addled Trump's voting base have no significant influence on the financial wellbeing of black people in the US? That an electorate - however crippled by propaganda - who would install such people in Federal executive office is not racist? That would be silly.

Don't be silly.

 

[Seattle]

You are correct. I apologise.

Based on your argument, you just want black people to simply be more white.


How you can actually say this or believe this and think you should be taken seriously is beyond me.

Based on your argument being successful is "acting white". People who are successful in life, within a certain country, any country, tend to aspire to a certain standard. Whites do it, Asians do it, successful Blacks do it. Those black people who are having the greatest disparities in outcome are the only ones who talk about "acting white".

Is that you Bells?

A lot of things seem to be "beyond" you so that is no surprise. Have you ever been to the U.S.?

You think there is equality before the law in the US?

Yes, the laws aren't discriminatory. You can't legally consider race in hiring decisions, you can't refuse to rent to someone just because they are black, etc.

Some people are racist. That's the way humans are, worldwide.

You should ask yourself why such spaces are now so necessary. And then question why you think racism is so low in the US now.

Are you suggesting that it is unsafe to be black at Yale?

And women have more children "out of wedlock" (seriously?!) because they are denied the right and ability to access adequate reproductive healthcare - and are often forced to resort to inadequate and ineffective birth control as a result.

Are you seriously suggesting that 6 kids with 6 "baby daddy" in the hood is because they can't access Planned Parenthood?

You want to address inequality? Then you need to address the root cause of that inequality. You can pay blacks the same as white people, but they will still be poorer because they will never be given the same opportunities and options that white people have. And that is the reality for black Americans. Something you will never experience.

Equality of opportunity is what is given. There is no equality of outcomes. If black people are paid the same as whites and still end up with far less assets, that's not something that has anything to do with racism.

Jewish people have more assets than white people. It's not because of racism directed at white people.

Just as a white person, you will have less chance of being shot if pulled over for a traffic stop by the police, compared to a black person - who will be racially profiled and the risk of his dying during even a routine traffic stop increases dramatically because of bias and racism and how it shapes the attitude of police officers when dealing with African Americans and other minorities. It's why black people keep being murdered by police, be they on or off duty.

Just repeating this doesn't make it true and it's not true.

 

[Seattle]

? It is among the best documented and most obvious truths about US society and politics and financial structuring there is. It is quite possibly the best established fact of American politics and financial structure.

If you really can't see something that obvious, that overt, that large and flagrant and frequently demonstrated in front of your face, then there is no hope for you - as I have long recommended to liberals and lefties dealing with American fascism, there is no point in addressing your fantasy world at all. No discussion is possible with people who simply deny physical reality when it conflicts with their presumptions.

If, on the other hand, you care to dig yourself out of that ridiculous hole, I can provide you with a reading list for starters - including intellectuals, researchers, economists, and reputable authors who have made themselves acceptable to "respectable" media by mouthing bothsides platitudes with the necessary frequency (such as Matt Taibbi).

That would be very bad news.

And yet it's true. There is racism in the U.S. as is the case with the rest of the human race. Comparatively speaking, the U.S. is not a "racist nation".

You aren't thinking about black people the way you would to your daughter (if you had/have one). If your daughter was 30 with 5 kids and 5 "baby daddies" you wouldn't say "It's not your fault, you don't have enough money for proper health care".

If someone has 5 kids and is poor they get money from the government and they certain can get condoms, abortions, and any other health service out there. It's truly silly to imply that you can't afford a condom but you can afford 5 kids. You are the racist here. That's treating/thinking of blacks as some form of inferior being.

 

[Tiassa]

You aren't thinking about black people the way you would to your daughter (if you had/have one). If your daughter was 30 with 5 kids and 5 "baby daddies" you wouldn't say "It's not your fault, you don't have enough money for proper health care".

The idea that we are supposed to take you seriously is itself offensive.

To the other, this has been a phenomenon long under construction in supremacist society. That is to say, you're hardly the only one.

Moreover—

If someone has 5 kids and is poor they get money from the government and they certain can get condoms, abortions, and any other health service out there. It's truly silly to imply that you can't afford a condom but you can afford 5 kids. You are the racist here. That's treating/thinking of blacks as some form of inferior being.

—the desperation is palpable: No, other human beings are not going to behave according to your requisite behavioral economics. Remember, you're the one who rejects↗ the psychoanalytic meaning of history as a redundant↗ notion. This is an important point to consider because your psychohistorical assessment requires that other people make decisions according to an imposed behavioral economy, which in turn describes not so much an utter dearth of pathos, but, rather, a subversive antipathy toward particular and circumstantial applications thereof.

Remember, I come from a generation in which youth could hear, simultaneously, prescriptions of marrying well as a significant expectation of women, a happy hour lament of the common husband lovelessly bound cold and wicked fish, and the ice-sculpted delicacy of the masculine bawl against golddiggers.

Weirdly, that paragraph reminds of a joke I made yesterday: The point arose that somone was confused by another who simultaneously answered "Black Lives Matter", with, "All Lives Matter", while crowing in particular that, "Blue Lives Matter".° It seemed apparent that the problem was methodological, presupposing someone would think about more than one thing long enough to recognize two elements, and, moreover, requiring a person would know what to do next; it wasn't absolutley illogical, but, rather, wrongly°° estimated a circumstance. In our present, I'm reminding of a time when people could ostensibly recognize three aspects simultaneously.

Moreover, I am uncertain where to begin with the number of fallacies about your entire pretense. History is littered with tales of how, if we treat people like shit, some of them will behave poorly. For one who sees so little difference between the tales that history tells and the reason why any given lie becomes the one agreed upon, you really aren't anything of a surprise. The featureless mulch pabulum you're offering is a nearly inevitable result.

• • •​

Fourth-wall note: It just shouldn't require the bit from a literal fantasy world. And, really, the unfortunate requisite disclaimer, there, is that the setup, the reminder that it is a fantasy novel, only confuses for clarifying, which in turn is hardly surprising insofar as turd should ever be necessary in the first place.
____________________

Notes:

° What, is that somehow confusing? To reject the particular by asserting the general while also requiring the particular in a different application, is, prima facie, fallacious; the way out, on this occasion, being to presuppose a priori, the merit of one particular over another, without having established the difference, either between particular applications or, as such, the general and particular.

°° That is, "over-".

 

[Seattle]

The idea that we are supposed to take you seriously is itself offensive.

To the other, this has been a phenomenon long under construction in supremacist society. That is to say, you're hardly the only one.

Moreover—



—the desperation is palpable: No, other human beings are not going to behave according to your requisite behavioral economics. Remember, you're the one who rejects↗ the psychoanalytic meaning of history as a redundant↗ notion. This is an important point to consider because your psychohistorical assessment requires that other people make decisions according to an imposed behavioral economy, which in turn describes not so much an utter dearth of pathos, but, rather, a subversive antipathy toward particular and circumstantial applications thereof.

Remember, I come from a generation in which youth could hear, simultaneously, prescriptions of marrying well as a significant expectation of women, a happy hour lament of the common husband lovelessly bound cold and wicked fish, and the ice-sculpted delicacy of the masculine bawl against golddiggers.

Weirdly, that paragraph reminds of a joke I made yesterday: The point arose that somone was confused by another who simultaneously answered "Black Lives Matter", with, "All Lives Matter", while crowing in particular that, "Blue Lives Matter".° It seemed apparent that the problem was methodological, presupposing someone would think about more than one thing long enough to recognize two elements, and, moreover, requiring a person would know what to do next; it wasn't absolutley illogical, but, rather, wrongly°° estimated a circumstance. In our present, I'm reminding of a time when people could ostensibly recognize three aspects simultaneously.

Moreover, I am uncertain where to begin with the number of fallacies about your entire pretense. History is littered with tales of how, if we treat people like shit, some of them will behave poorly. For one who sees so little difference between the tales that history tells and the reason why any given lie becomes the one agreed upon, you really aren't anything of a surprise. The featureless mulch pabulum you're offering is a nearly inevitable result.

• • •​

Fourth-wall note: It just shouldn't require the bit from a literal fantasy world. And, really, the unfortunate requisite disclaimer, there, is that the setup, the reminder that it is a fantasy novel, only confuses for clarifying, which in turn is hardly surprising insofar as turd should ever be necessary in the first place.
____________________

Notes:

° What, is that somehow confusing? To reject the particular by asserting the general while also requiring the particular in a different application, is, prima facie, fallacious; the way out, on this occasion, being to presuppose a priori, the merit of one particular over another, without having established the difference, either between particular applications or, as such, the general and particular.

°° That is, "over-".

Telling someone that you can't take them serious adds nothing to your argument (if you even have one). Calling someone a racist adds nothing to an argument.

You actually have nothing of import to add to most discussion. To the one, you have a quirky way of writing, to the other you like to add footnotes.

We all know that there will always be racism. Like poverty, it's not one of those things that you can totally eliminate. We try to keep it to a low level and due to diminishing returns we move on to other things that have more affect in our lives.

Many blacks are doing quite well. Those that aren't are largely not doing as well due to circumstances within their control (just like the ones who are doing well).

It's fine to talk about perceived injustices and things that just are "fair" but actual differences in results or outcomes are mainly due to the decisions of individuals.

Are you doing as well as some of your peers? If so great. If not, is it mainly their fault or your fault? To wit, are you responsible for the outcomes in your life more than other unfairness that may crop up in your life from time to time?

I'd try to work "turd" into the discussion but then I'd be into your territory, a territory I'd rather avoid, y'know.

 

[parmalee]

Based on your argument being successful is "acting white".

So now you're just gonna pretend that you didn't say this?

If an asian person who name was Phong Kim faced this problem what would happen? Would his name suddenly change to John Kim? If Shoquisha Jones is having a hard time getting into Harvard I'm sure she is smart enough to become Sherrie Jones. This isn't a real problem. Your white guilt is showing.

If you can't even make the effort (ha! like it should even take effort) to be honest, I'm not even gonna bother with the rest of that garbage.

 

[Tiassa]

Telling someone that you can't take them serious adds nothing to your argument (if you even have one). Calling someone a racist adds nothing to an argument.

You actually have nothing of import to add to most discussion. To the one, you have a quirky way of writing, to the other you like to add footnotes.

Oh, please. Okay, fine, let's make an effort to take you seriously, for a moment:

We all know that there will always be racism. Like poverty, it's not one of those things that you can totally eliminate. We try to keep it to a low level and due to diminishing returns we move on to other things that have more affect in our lives.

Many blacks are doing quite well. Those that aren't are largely not doing as well due to circumstances within their control (just like the ones who are doing well).

It's fine to talk about perceived injustices and things that just are "fair" but actual differences in results or outcomes are mainly due to the decisions of individuals.

As much as you might resent the implications of what I have to say, perhaps you shouldn't go out of your way to make my point for me. To wit, check it—what did I say?

• No, other human beings are not going to behave according to your requisite behavioral economics. Remember, you're the one who rejects the psychoanalytic meaning of history as a redundant notion. This is an important point to consider because your psychohistorical assessment requires that other people make decisions according to an imposed behavioral economy, which in turn describes not so much an utter dearth of pathos, but, rather, a subversive antipathy toward particular and circumstantial applications thereof.​

And faced with the proposition of an imposed behavioral economy, you went ahead and made the point explicitly:

• "It's fine to talk about perceived injustices and things that just are 'fair' but actual differences in results or outcomes are mainly due to the decisions of individuals."​

So, we tried to take you seriously, and look what happened, it turned out to be a waste of time. Tell us, are you anything better than a waste of other people's time? If so great. If not, is it mainly their fault or your fault? To wit, are you responsible for the outcomes in your life, or do you need to complain about other people?

 

[arfa brane]

Many blacks are doing quite well. Those that aren't are largely not doing as well due to circumstances within their control (just like the ones who are doing well).

What about the black parents (I really should use African American instead, but we understand here I'm not intentionally using a racial term, just a convenient one, like white, or, erm, yellow . . .) who worry about whether their children will be shot dead by the police, for driving while black, or walking, or it seems, doing anything that "ordinary, white" people do all the time and who don't get arrested or beaten up, or shot? Maybe that's because the white folks are also "doing quite well", and the police can see this.
Or . . .

Why do black parents worry or feel they should worry? Why don't they comfort themselves with "Many blacks are doing quite well"? Why doesn't that work for them when they get the phone call that tells them their child is dead at the hands of the police?

And we all know the reason is: because the children of African American parents are much more likely to encounter police violence, and for no reason other than being non-white. It's because these parents are living in a country where racism is, factually and demonstrably, endemic.

 

[Seattle]

Oh, please. Okay, fine, let's make an effort to take you seriously, for a moment:



As much as you might resent the implications of what I have to say, perhaps you shouldn't go out of your way to make my point for me. To wit, check it—what did I say?

• No, other human beings are not going to behave according to your requisite behavioral economics. Remember, you're the one who rejects the psychoanalytic meaning of history as a redundant notion. This is an important point to consider because your psychohistorical assessment requires that other people make decisions according to an imposed behavioral economy, which in turn describes not so much an utter dearth of pathos, but, rather, a subversive antipathy toward particular and circumstantial applications thereof.​

And faced with the proposition of an imposed behavioral economy, you went ahead and made the point explicitly:

• "It's fine to talk about perceived injustices and things that just are 'fair' but actual differences in results or outcomes are mainly due to the decisions of individuals."​

So, we tried to take you seriously, and look what happened, it turned out to be a waste of time. Tell us, are you anything better than a waste of other people's time? If so great. If not, is it mainly their fault or your fault? To wit, are you responsible for the outcomes in your life, or do you need to complain about other people?

I can't care how you or anyone else acts. If you act like you have a chip on your shoulder, if you are waiting for life to be "fair", if you don't want to be clearly understood by others...great.

Call it acting white or don't call it that. If things don't work out well for you, that's fine as well.

I'm not complaining. You are. That's all you do as far as I can tell. Are you ever "happy" or content regarding anything?

Again, whatever the answer is...that's fine with me.

This is a discussion forum so if you expect everyone to either agree with you are be a racist, you will be in for a surprise. That's not how it works. It's not either agree with me or you are a troll. That's intellectually lazy, which you frequently are, non-standing the long windedness with notes act.

If I tell you my life is fine (which it is) you won't like that. "Ok, your life is fine but what about everyone else". If I say my life isn't fine you'll say "Well if you weren't such a racist maybe it would be better".

The fact is that in terms of outcomes rather than intentions, the current anti-racial groups aren't helping anyone's outcomes.

This isn't working. Get it? You consider yourself liberal but you are intolerant of any viewpoint other than your own. Since the goal is to totally eliminate racism, poverty, unemployment, etc. and since you know that will never happen, you are just creating dissatisfaction among groups so that they will rely on "you".

If they don't see racism behind every corner, if they correct certain cultural pathologies and do what works for every other group then they don't need "you" any longer.

I'm not the racist. You keep telling me that I don't like blacks or that I'm somehow causing them harm. I'm not. You probably know I'm not. You are a bigot. You prove it every day. That's the bottom line.

Trying to turn yourself into a societal critic from your mom's basement, in between playing video games and watching anime isn't a serious background for a social commentator.

Before you say "You don't know me" let me remind you that you don't know me but that doesn't stop your name calling or air headed snap judgements.

You don't have any experience in life to be making all the judgemental comments that you seem to like to make..."gaslighting", "anti-social", "trolling" etc.

I may be wrong but I'm guessing that you've never really had a "real" job in your life have you? Is that why life is 'unfair"? You would be wealthy, a respected member of the community, give to charity and pass wisdom down through the generations if only life wasn't so "unfair"?