All things Racist...USA edition (4 Viewers)

[Farb]

I was looking for a place to put this so we could discuss but didn't really find a place that worked so I created this thread so we can all place articles, experiences, videos and examples of racism in the USA.

This is one that happened this week. The lady even called and filed a complaint on the officer. This officer also chose to wear the body cam (apparently, LA doesn't require this yet). This exchange wasn't necessarily racist IMO until she started with the "mexican racist...you will never be white, like you want" garbage. That is when it turned racist IMO

All the murderer and other insults, I think are just a by product of CRT and ACAB rhetoric that is very common on the radical left and sadly is being brought to mainstream in this country.

Another point that I think is worth mentioning is she is a teacher and the sense of entitlement she feels is mind blowing.

https://news.yahoo.com/black-teacher-berates-latino-la-221235341.html

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I am from Latin America and did not live in the USA during that era. After some research it is seems LBJ used the N word regularly, but perhaps you are correct regarding his quest to end poverty with his 1965 bill.

By the way the Civil Rights Act passed because of Republicans. The bill was opposed by the Democrats of that era as they were the party of the KKK. IN 1960 the rate of children out of wedlock in black America was 23%% and today it is over 70%. Among whites out of wedlock births were extremely low around 3% and today is over 25%. In the USA single motherhood is a sentence for poverty. Kids from two parent homes have a low rate of poverty. The LBJ war on poverty failed and yet some politicians want more of that. On the other side the Republicans have no answers either. They preach responsibility and hard work to people that cannot do such things as they mostly come from a single parent dysfunctional home. The unintended consequences of the 1965 Bill were massive and predicted by Moynihan.

Your acrimonious remarks are not needed and do not advance your position.

My comments aren’t acrimonious, I actually like you. They are intended to help because honestly your lack of knowledge on this subject is a bad look for an otherwise really bright guy.

Yes, the CRA was a bipartisan bill comprised of Republicans and North Eastern Democrats (the Kennedy Coalition). It makes your assertion LBJ did it for votes even more ludicrous. LBJ’s war on poverty has been a resounding success. In 1964 only 18% of blacks lived above the poverty line, today only about 22% live below the poverty line. in 1964 only 3% of blacks had a college degree. Today 31% of blacks do. That is insanely successful. If you care about the subject I’d read this paper.

https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/154286/50YearTrends.pdf

if you do you’ll see how incredibly wrong you are about the success of The Great Society. It’s arguably the most successful legacy of any president outside of Lincoln and Roosevelt. Maybe Eisenhower as well.

Single parent issues has more to do with the sexual revolution of the 70’s and the reduction in marital rates from women gaining some sense of economic independence. It’s a completely different subject than anything LBJ did.

 

[Paul]

This is bordering very closely on the absurd "atheism is a religion" argument made by some evangelicals. It's no less ridiculous in this context.

I am not saying it is a religion. I called it a pseudo-religion. It is possible to have religious fervor for a cause that has nothing to do with a deity. Many on the far left and far right fit that category and they are equally dangerous.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I am not saying it is a religion. I called it a pseudo-religion. It is possible to have religious fervor for a cause that has nothing to do with a deity. Many on the far left and far right fit that category and they are equally dangerous.

You are misunderstanding my point again. The "far-left pseudo-religion" you're talking about is a small minority, especially when compared to the mainstream religious takeover of the GOP.

 

[Paul]

My comments aren’t acrimonious, I actually like you. They are intended to help because honestly your lack of knowledge on this subject is a bad look for an otherwise really bright guy.

Yes, the CRA was a bipartisan bill comprised of Republicans and North Eastern Democrats (the Kennedy Coalition). It makes your assertion LBJ did it for votes even more ludicrous. LBJ’s war on poverty has been a resounding success. In 1964 only 18% of blacks lived above the poverty line, today only about 22% live below the poverty line. in 1964 only 3% of blacks had a college degree. Today 31% of blacks do. That is insanely successful. If you care about the subject I’d read this paper.

Blacks have achieved tremendous progress and it is rare to find a person that acknowledges this. However, there was a price to pay and that has to do with a recalcitrant segment that remains at the bottom.

Most graphs I see regarding the rate of poverty show that the poverty rate was falling before the 1965 bill. The slope of the curve flattened after 1970 with small ups and downs. Having said that I do not think poverty can be totally eliminated because humans exist in a gradation of talent and success. That means there will always be people at the bottom.

https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/154286/50YearTrends.pdf

if you do you’ll see how incredibly wrong you are about the success of The Great Society. It’s arguably the most successful legacy of any president outside of Lincoln and Roosevelt. Maybe Eisenhower as well.

Single parent issues has more to do with the sexual revolution of the 70’s and the reduction in marital rates from women gaining some sense of economic independence. It’s a completely different subject than anything LBJ did.

I do not disagree with the success. This is the first time in world history when poor people are obese due to excess calories. That sounds like a cruel statement, but it simply means that there is progress.

 

[Paul]

You are misunderstanding my point again. The "far-left pseudo-religion" you're talking about is a small minority, especially when compared to the mainstream religious takeover of the GOP.

OK, at least you admit they do exist.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Blacks have achieved tremendous progress and it is rare to find a person that acknowledges this. However, there was a price to pay and that has to do with a recalcitrant segment that remains at the bottom.

Most graphs I see regarding the rate of poverty show that the poverty rate was falling before the 1965 bill. The slope of the curve flattened after 1970 with small ups and downs. Having said that I do not think poverty can be totally eliminated because humans exist in a gradation of talent and success. That means there will always be people at the bottom.

I do not disagree with the success. This is the first time in world history when poor people are obese due to excess calories. That sounds like a cruel statement, but it simply means that there is progress.

There were Civil Rights bills before 1964. It’s the most famous one because it effectively ended segregation, but LBJ actually passed 3 other bills while in the Senate. It’s pretty complex because of things like the Great Migration of blacks to California in the 50’s. So while southern blacks were mired in poverty those that migrated to Cali after WW2 were doing better economically. Cali ended segregation in 1935 so there was better economic opportunities there.

LBJ’s efforts for a Great Society didn’t start when he became President or even VP. It had been his goal since he was in the House and he leveraged his power as Majority Leader to pass 3 other Civil Rights bills in the 50’s.

But yes, there will always be poverty. Like racism, sexism, etc. It’s part of the human condition and can’t be eradicated.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

BTW, I STRONGLY recommend learning more about LBJ. He was a complex character who did more for people in this country than they realize. He doesn’t get the credit he deserves for his social or political impact. He changed the way politics in America functioned and heralded the great political evolution that gave us our modern demographic political dynamic.

I recommend Robert Caro’s book series on him:

The Years of Lyndon Johnson Book Series: Amazon.com

 

[cuddlemonkey]

OK, at least you admit they do exist.

If you're going to continue to engage, at least pretend like you are doing it in good faith. This nonsense should be beneath everyone here.

 

[MT15]

Paul, it isn’t rare to find anyone who will admit that black people have made progress in the US since the 1960’s. It’s this kind of straw man statement that erodes your ability to engage honestly on here.

 

[wardorican]

You are making my point. The Democrats used ID politics to cultivate the black vote. LBJ pushed for the 1964 Civil Rights Act to get votes. LBJ who was a racist somehow knew black identity politics was the future. That someone did it before makes no difference. Two wrongs do not make a right. Sure, it is important to form groups to petition the government, but that is different than using skin color to dictate which party to vote for.

As for anti-left bias. I obviously think race ID politics is a disaster that leads to division, tribalism, and civil war. 200 years from now historians will look at this race ID era and conclude it was a mistake BTW, I am aware many want to end the USA as a nation, but I think that is a mistake.

This feels like you're just saying that anything the political left does in response to the right is the wrong thing.

Also, this completely is a rehash of the 1990's Politically Correct argument.

"Cancel culture" was about accountability for how one acts. Has it gone too far at times, yes. Is it a culture of wanting to remove everyone in power? No. It's just fear mongering from the right.

 

[MT15]

BTW, I STRONGLY recommend learning more about LBJ. He was a complex character who did more for people in this country than they realize. He doesn’t get the credit he deserves for his social or political impact. He changed the way politics in America functioned and heralded the great political evolution that gave us our modern demographic political dynamic.

I recommend Robert Caro’s book series on him:

The Years of Lyndon Johnson Book Series: Amazon.com

SBTB, I had no idea you were so knowledgeable about this subject. Do you have any interest in leading a discussion for the rest of us about this part of our history? We could start a new thread, and make it a book discussion for those of us interested in learning about it.

 

[wardorican]

SBTB, I had no idea you were so knowledgeable about this subject. Do you have any interest in leading a discussion for the rest of us about this part of our history? We could start a new thread, and make it a book discussion for those of us interested in learning about it.

Seconded.

All in favor?

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Seconded.

All in favor?

Aye.

 

[Saintamaniac]

The LBJ war on poverty failed and yet some politicians want more of that.

As someone already demonstrated this is simply not true. BTW, trickle down economics (tax cuts for the rich) has failed time and time again yet it is the rallying cry of the right.

Blacks have achieved tremendous progress and it is rare to find a person that acknowledges this.

I did so just the other day and so have others. It's not necessary to turn a blind eye or make misleading statements to try to make a point.

However, there was a price to pay and that has to do with a recalcitrant segment that remains at the bottom.

For what was there a price to pay?

This is the first time in world history when poor people are obese due to excess calories. That sounds like a cruel statement, but it simply means that there is progress.

In case you don't fully understand the reasoning for the statement you made above, the introduction of fast foods and processed foods coincided with the overall decline in health and increase in obesity of the population especially the low income population. Today, the cheapest foods tend to be the most unhealthy foods available. And because they are cheap, they are usually the targets of the lowest income. With either both parents working or in single parent households, quick and easy processed foods became a staple of low income diets. As a result, their has been an explosion in the number of people who are obese that live below the poverty line.

Obesity in people below the poverty line is not an indication of progress. Your logic is severely flawed.

 

[Paul]

As someone already demonstrated this is simply not true. BTW, trickle down economics (tax cuts for the rich) has failed time and time again yet it is the rallying cry of the right.

The Republican ideas have also failed, no argument from me. The concept of you are on your own does not work for all. In the same manner the concept of the state taking care of all is also flawed. I don't know what trickle down economics means. That is a term that seems more like a sound byte. Are you saying a strong economy is not good enough? That may be true for a segment of the population.

I did so just the other day and so have others. It's not necessary to turn a blind eye or make misleading statements to try to make a point.

Yes, you acknowledged progress. I have now seen two posters that admit the progress. Why is that important? Form a psychological point of view we want to see that we are moving forward. Perennial pessimism leads to nihilism.

For what was there a price to pay?

The out of wedlock children rate went up a lot in all segments of society. The only exception is among the rich. Yes, marriage remains high among high earners and is over 80%. Meanwhile marriage in low earners is quite low, 24%. IN the USA kids form single parent home tend to struggle academically and have a greater probability of poverty. Marriage among Indian and East Asians remains high and the benefits show.

In case you don't fully understand the reasoning for the statement you made above, the introduction of fast foods and processed foods coincided with the overall decline in health and increase in obesity of the population especially the low income population. Today, the cheapest foods tend to be the most unhealthy foods available. And because they are cheap, they are usually the targets of the lowest income. With either both parents working or in single parent households, quick and easy processed foods became a staple of low income diets. As a result, their has been an explosion in the number of people who are obese that live below the poverty line.

Obesity in people below the poverty line is not an indication of progress. Your logic is severely flawed.

You did not realize I was posting with tongue in check. Sure, poor people live in areas where it is hard to find healthy foods. Why is that? IN any event at least this is not like in the past where poor people were skinny and the rich were obese. No we have the reverse.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I guess we can simplify this. Will anyone who thinks blacks have not made significant progress over the last 50 years please stand up.

Bueller.. Bueller... Bueller...

 

[Paul]

I guess we can simplify this. Will anyone who thinks blacks have not made significant progress over the last 50 years please stand up.

Bueller.. Bueller... Bueller...

We are finally getting somewhere mate!!

 

[MT15]

Oh good lord. This is the definition of a straw man argument. Everyone acknowledges that we have improvement in race relations from the 1950s and 1960s.