New Poll on Police Shooting of Black Men (1 Viewer)

[Farb]

https://www.skeptic.com/research-center/reports/Research-Report-CUPES-007.pdf

(the answer is at the maximum 27)

I heard about this new poll from a podcast I listen to on the regular. To me, this is disturbing to say the least. We allowed idiots to burn down private businesses and cities because of the horrible reporting and the narrative pushed by politicians the media.

If we as a country are going to move forward (I am not so sure we do move forward as a country) we need to have actual fact based discussions that are not based on feeling and implied intent. There is a rush in the country to label any perceived injustice as race based and obviously this is not the case in reality but it does make nice headlines and gather votes.

 

[Farb]

Did you read all of them? Because @UncleTrvlingJim made a good post explaining that:


But you're still asking for a 'law or policy that is directly racist' to show that systemic racism exists?

That's not how that works. A system that does include directly racist laws is obviously going to be systemically racist in its outcomes, but it should be immediately obvious that a system with indirectly racist laws and policies will be too. And once you've accepted that, it should become apparent that there are a lot of laws, policies, and ongoing prejudices that clearly fit into that category. Voting laws, perceptions of poverty, criminality, aptitude, attitude, disproportionate impact from policies like three strikes laws, racial bias in bail decisions... it's really not hard to see it. I can see it from over 3,000 miles away, you should be able to see it from there.

'Systemic racism' doesn't mean "a system that is overtly and consciously racist"; it just means racism that is in the system. While that can be overt, it can also be less so, and it can also be a self-perpetuating legacy of prejudicial perceptions, laws, and policies from previous overt racism.

Ok, so can you point to an actual law that so easily demonstrates what you just stated? I show you a ton from the past, but I can't see one in current law. That is all I am asking, show me a current law that is enforced today that is racist. Just one.

It is so easy to see from 3K miles away, copy and pasting one should not be that hard.

I also posted a definition of systemic racism in response to the quote from UTJ you quoted above but now that is not a good enough definition.

Can you all get together and pick a definition that you all agree with for 'systemic racism' that we can use going forward that won't be changed every couple days? I am more than willing to use any sourceable definition of systemic racism you guys choose as long as it doesn't have to change every few days. Sincere request.

 

[bdb13]

Ok, so can you point to an actual law that so easily demonstrates what you just stated? I show you a ton from the past, but I can't see one in current law. That is all I am asking, show me a current law that is enforced today that is racist. Just one.

It is so easy to see from 3K miles away, copy and pasting one should not be that hard.

I also posted a definition of systemic racism in response to the quote from UTJ you quoted above but now that is not a good enough definition.

Can you all get together and pick a definition that you all agree with for 'systemic racism' that we can use going forward that won't be changed every couple days? I am more than willing to use any sourceable definition of systemic racism you guys choose as long as it doesn't have to change every few days. Sincere request.

The way I read your definition there, I don't see it saying that in order for systemic racism to exist there must be outright and blatant racism in law itself.

I think your definition actually covers most of what others have argued in here.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Ok, so can you point to an actual law that so easily demonstrates what you just stated? I show you a ton from the past, but I can't see one in current law. That is all I am asking, show me a current law that is enforced today that is racist. Just one.

It is so easy to see from 3K miles away, copy and pasting one should not be that hard.

I also posted a definition of systemic racism in response to the quote from UTJ you quoted above but now that is not a good enough definition.

Can you all get together and pick a definition that you all agree with for 'systemic racism' that we can use going forward that won't be changed every couple days? I am more than willing to use any sourceable definition of systemic racism you guys choose as long as it doesn't have to change every few days. Sincere request.

This is why I said early on that you are working on a different definition than the rest of us. You seem to believe that there can only be systemic racism if there's an explicit law like "We'll throw black people in prison just because". Which I don't know anyone who says that is the case.

But this is pretty simple, because the definition you posted didn't say that there has to be an explicit law -- it can apply to practices. I think you would agree that if you don't apply the law equally, that would be an example of sytemic racism right? We've talked about this many times on this board. It was in all the speeches that politicians made -- it's about equal application of the law. But you seem to keep ignoring that, and still stick to a definition that no one is arguing in favor of.

 

[bdb13]

This is why I said early on that you are working on a different definition than the rest of us. You seem to believe that there can only be systemic racism if there's an explicit law like "We'll throw black people in prison just because". Which I don't know anyone who says that is the case.

But this is pretty simple, because the definition you posted didn't say that there has to be an explicit law -- it can apply to practices. I think you would agree that if you don't apply the law equally, that would be an example of sytemic racism right? We've talked about this many times on this board. It was in all the speeches that politicians made -- it's about equal application of the law. But you seem to keep ignoring that, and still stick to a definition that no one is arguing in favor of.

It's good if it's difficult-to-impossible to find explicit examples of racism in US law today.. but explicit racism in law is only an aspect of systemic racism, not the totality of it.. and somewhere in there is where it's getting lost here.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

To follow up in case I wasn't being clear about what I'm talking about, let's take an example I got from @JimEverett years ago. Most people arrested for marijuana possession are black, but one of the biggest users of marijuana are white college students. This would be an example of what we're talking about - there's nothing explicitly racist about a law that makes it illegal to possess marijuana -- but if you use that law to arrest black people and not white people, it's application is unequal and an example of systemic racism. It doesn't even have to be a racist cop deciding to use the law to go after black people (although that probably happens too) -- a lot of this comes from cops patrolling what they deem to be high crime areas and stopping what they deem to be "suspicious behavior" - and when the only thing they find is marijuana possession, they still book them, because you know if they're in a high crime area, looking shifty, they're probably criminals anyway, so this is a way to lock them up. And I don't meant that sarcastically, most cops probably believe this is a good way to lower crime -- but the end result is a 19 year old black teen in an inner city gets a rap sheet, making him harder to employ, and a 19 year old white teen at Brown gets to keep going to college. Now apply that over 50 years of that sort of application of the law.

It's obviously a complicated issue, but theoretically it should be something conservatives rally behind. After all, what can be more conservative than protecting American citizens from the power of the state? I've said many times that I think we'd be a lot better off if we decided to put as much fervor behind the 4th Amendment that we do the 1st and 2nd.

 

[MT15]

Is that the standard now? As long as riots only damage private businesses and homes in a 'few block' area, it is no big deal? This is called gaslighting.

Maybe if we can catch him, he can lead us to the secret White Supremacy hideout and we can catch the other 99 white supremacist in this country!

Yes, I am being sarcastic. I know there might be a few more white supremacist in this country but you guys tend to see them behind every tree and in every alley. (I still think it is because of the political narrative pushed by the media and politicians).

I don’t think you know what gaslighting is, tbh. His response was to your assertion that multiple cities were burned down this summer. He was pointing out your hyperbole.

Also, the FBI thinks far right extremists, which include white nationalists and white supremacists, are the most dangerous domestic terror threats. Would the FBI be lying about that? It’s far more likely that whoever you are listening to that is downplaying the existence and the threat of white nationalism is gaslighting you. It’s probably Carlson, the lying frozen fish stick heir.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

It's good if it's difficult-to-mpossible to find explicit examples of racism in US law today.. but explicit racism in law is only an aspect of systemic racism, not the totality of it.. and somewhere in there is where it's getting lost here.

Yeah, and I'm not really sure why that gets lost in these discussions. I feel like that's mainly all I talk about when it comes to this issue. We have decades of uneven application of the law -- that shirt doesn't go away overnight, particularly without a real apology and a concerted effort to correct the problem. Merely taking the explicit policy off the books doesn't suddenly make everything better.

 

[MT15]

This is the second or third time you’ve explained it in this thread alone. Something about leading a horse to water, I think....

Ayo has posted studies in the past that the uneven application of discipline starts in elementary school. Same offense, treatment of white kids and black kids is significantly different.

 

[brandon]

Ok, so can you point to an actual law that so easily demonstrates what you just stated?

Voter ID laws are an example of current laws that are indirectly racist. They disproportionately affect people of color. They are enacted specifically to suppress the vote of people who tend to vote Democrat.

Also, while not exactly a law, in the same vein is closing polling places in areas where people of color tend to vote. In Georgia, they’re working on closing polling places on Sundays. Why? Because black churches have been organizing after-church voter transportation, an event called “Souls to the Polls.”

The New Voter Suppression

Over the last decade, states have enacted voter restrictions that disproportionately disenfranchise racial minorities and distort our democracy.

www.brennancenter.org

 

[V Chip]

As far as systemic racism, I am still waiting on someone to show me a law or policy that is directly racist.

I already did that.

As far as the cities burning, I guess I was being hyperbolic then. I didn't know we considered Berlin in 1945 untouched since a few buildings were still standing.

You’re doing it again.

Name me one city where only “a few buildings” were left standing.

Just one.

Heck I’ll make it easy. Name one city where, say, 1% of buildings were burned down.

And you come here saying the left is being misled by media and politicians about the scale of murders of black people by the police?

 

[V Chip]

Is that the standard now? As long as riots only damage private businesses and homes in a 'few block' area, it is no big deal? This is called gaslighting.

Nope, that’s not what gaslighting is.

 

[V Chip]

Voter ID laws are an example of current laws that are indirectly racist. They disproportionately affect people of color. They are enacted specifically to suppress the vote of people who tend to vote Democrat.

Also, while not exactly a law, in the same vein is closing polling places in areas where people of color tend to vote. In Georgia, they’re working on closing polling places on Sundays. Why? Because black churches have been organizing after-church voter transportation, an event called “Souls to the Polls.”

Exactly.

Georgia House Bill 531 is a bill passed what, 2 days ago that is racist. He won’t admit it because it doesn’t say explicitly “we don’t want ****shirts to vote” but the closing early polling locations on Sunday when they have been open on Sundays for decades is specifically targeting POC and everyone who is voting in favor of that bill knows it.

 

[Farb]

I already did that.

You’re doing it again.

Name me one city where only “a few buildings” were left standing.

Just one.

Berlin. It was a metaphor.

 

[Farb]

Can someone, please provide a definition of 'systemic racism' so we can all use it going forward? Just a definition. Not proof even, just a definition.

 

[bdb13]

Can someone, please provide a definition of 'systemic racism' so we can all use it going forward? Just a definition. Not proof even, just a definition.

Yours from the other day was fine.

 

[brandon]

Can someone, please provide a definition of 'systemic racism' so we can all use it going forward? Just a definition. Not proof even, just a definition.

Your definition is fine, as has been stated multiple times. Examples have been provided that meet your definition.

 

[V Chip]

Berlin. It was a metaphor.

No, you were being a sarcastic arse getting indignant and acting like your opposition was going to extremes because you got called out for being a hypocrite.

And it isn’t a metaphor, either.

 

[Farb]

Why are voter ID laws racist?