Racism in America (with data)

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Kurth »

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:51 am And, yes, this country has, undeniably been a "white supremacist nation" in the past, but it's certainly not one today.
I just can't buy this idea that a nation has to say 'whites rule' out loud while they do it in the shadows. I guess we could argue whether there is some outward belief in the superiority and its all about maintaining their own power. But that's incoherent when the outcomes are so consistently aligned to race versus other potential groupings.
But the saying out loud part is important to the whole de facto v. de jure question, isn’t it? It’s kind of the whole point.

This is semantics, but it’s also not just semantics. When I google “white supremacy defined,” the first definition I get (Oxford Languages) reads:
the belief that white people constitute a superior race and should therefore dominate society, typically to the exclusion or detriment of other racial and ethnic groups, in particular black or Jewish people.
White supremacy is a whole different flavor of racism. People can be racist in an uncountable number of ways and for many different reasons. But a true white supremacist is a very specific beast, and, yes, it definitely has a lot to do with the outward belief in the superiority of whiteness. To say that we live in a racist country is one thing. To say we live in a white supremacist country carries a distinctly different meaning.

And I agree 100% with LawBeefaroni that no one who’s participating in good faith in a discussion about racial inequality in this country should be leaving the table because of a disagreement over labels. But, at the same time, if we’re trying to get more people to sit at that table and engage, shouldn’t we be trying to use labels that are more accurate and less inflammatory?

If a prerequisite to starting an honest dialogue about racial inequality and systemic racism in this country is agreement that racism is a significant problem in U.S. and, in many respects, the U.S. remains a racist country, I think we can widen the circle and get more people involved. If the prerequisite is agreement that the U.S. is a “white supremacist nation,” I think the circle shrinks significantly.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 4:49 pm
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:51 am And, yes, this country has, undeniably been a "white supremacist nation" in the past, but it's certainly not one today.
I just can't buy this idea that a nation has to say 'whites rule' out loud while they do it in the shadows. I guess we could argue whether there is some outward belief in the superiority and its all about maintaining their own power. But that's incoherent when the outcomes are so consistently aligned to race versus other potential groupings.
But the saying out loud part is important to the whole de facto v. de jure question, isn’t it? It’s kind of the whole point.
Only because you are insisting it's important. I think it's meaningless when we are talking about outcomes. Is it more important what we say or what we do?
This is semantics, but it’s also not just semantics. When I google “white supremacy defined,” the first definition I get (Oxford Languages) reads:
the belief that white people constitute a superior race and should therefore dominate society, typically to the exclusion or detriment of other racial and ethnic groups, in particular black or Jewish people.
And IMO that definition changes nothing. I even caveated there was a legitimate question there potentially. One could argue whether there really is a belief or just something that produces the outcomes as if the belief exists. That would matter in the sense it'd change how you tackle it. However, it's clear from the reaction people really have cartoonish beliefs about what white supremacy is and think it's hyperbolic when it is more one motive of many to rationalize the reason for these racist outcomes.
White supremacy is a whole different flavor of racism. People can be racist in an uncountable number of ways and for many different reasons. But a true white supremacist is a very specific beast, and, yes, it definitely has a lot to do with the outward belief in the superiority of whiteness. To say that we live in a racist country is one thing. To say we live in a white supremacist country carries a distinctly different meaning.
I disagree. I took pains to explain that I believe we are a nation where it was driven underground but never actually conquered. IMO we still see the signs of it everywhere. It isn't just garden variety racism. And I'd acknowledge that the law of the land as toothless as it is speaks to equality. But it also did when we were an outwardly white supremacist nation.
And I agree 100% with LawBeefaroni that no one who’s participating in good faith in a discussion about racial inequality in this country should be leaving the table because of a disagreement over labels. But, at the same time, if we’re trying to get more people to sit at that table and engage, shouldn’t we be trying to use labels that are more accurate and less inflammatory?
If you are taking this as inflammatory that's part of the problem. I'd recommend instead of arguing against the label that you engage on the thought exercise which I laid out.

In the end IMO this type of pushback is solely about feelings. And that to me is good in way. At the end of the day what I've experienced is a lot of white people get angry when they are confronted that what we face is darker than just racism. And getting past this backlash and just constantly proving the case might be the only way to make progress on it. I mean nothing else has really worked. We're almost 60 years from the Voting Rights Act and it's dead. And were seeing so-called racist gerrymanders making it through some systems as we speak. And they mostly are about building durable white control of government in the face of changing demographics.
If a prerequisite to starting an honest dialogue about racial inequality and systemic racism in this country is agreement that racism is a significant problem in U.S. and, in many respects, the U.S. remains a racist country, I think we can widen the circle and get more people involved. If the prerequisite is agreement that the U.S. is a “white supremacist nation,” I think the circle shrinks significantly.
This is the part of problem. If facing what might be the truth makes people so uncomfortable that we have to play these word games...we're never going to make progress. I mean look at the argument here. To paraphrase, 'we're just racist, people tend to agree on that, stick to it, and maybe more people will engage'. Yet as the argument goes on it'll drives people away when you try to assign a motive to that racism. That's pretty slippery ground and it artificially limits the discussion.

We seem to all agree that the nation had at some level outward white supremacist periods. Why do we think that is 100% behind us? If it is this notion of 'what does the law say', then how do we address when we see efforts that saw these laws hollowed out and the laws have no meaning or impact anymore? How do we account that white supremacist extremism is one of the fastest growing domestic terrorism issues we face?

It comes down to basic questions. Where does this racism stem from? Is it just baked into the machine and the machine is still stamping out racist outcomes? Or is resisting change to fix it an 'underground' or unsaid expression of white power stemming from a belief they deserve power more than other races? You have to wonder why is it so uniformly distributed against blacks in particular? That is why I think we need to stop pretending we don't have at some level a white supremacy problem at the root of this. Is it *all* white supremacy? No. There are also competing interests but still a blanket denial? When outcomes look a whole lot like what'd happen if we were outwardly white supremacist? That doesn't seem too wise to me.
Last edited by malchior on Thu Mar 31, 2022 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

noxiousdog wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 4:37 pm
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 2:50 pmThere is *plenty* of anti-Asian bigotry including violence. Still it also stands to reason that they're also 7% of the population and they *are* being ignored politically for the most part. Almost none of their policy preferences are acted upon. If you are talking about academic achievement and wealth, then it is generally true most populations of Asians are doing well. That could be an argument against white preferential treatment or evidence that not everyone is subject to the same forces uniformly. I don't know which but that's relatively hard to tease out. However, it doesn't really subtract from how blacks and Hispanics are obviously being discriminated uniformly throughout our society.
No, but it really substracts from the white supremecy claim.
Really? It doesn't really have a lot of relevance on what I'm trying to argue here. It strikes me that you fundamentally are missing the argument and are instead hyper-focused on the label.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Kurth »

malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 5:54 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 4:49 pm
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:51 am And, yes, this country has, undeniably been a "white supremacist nation" in the past, but it's certainly not one today.
I just can't buy this idea that a nation has to say 'whites rule' out loud while they do it in the shadows. I guess we could argue whether there is some outward belief in the superiority and its all about maintaining their own power. But that's incoherent when the outcomes are so consistently aligned to race versus other potential groupings.
But the saying out loud part is important to the whole de facto v. de jure question, isn’t it? It’s kind of the whole point.
Only because you are insisting it's important. I think it's meaningless when we are talking about outcomes. Is it more important what we say or what we do?
To be clear, you are the one that first introduced the concept of de jure v. de facto states of being when you made the argument on the last page that "I'd argue [the U.S.] is de facto white supremacist." Again, with the goal of actually saying what we mean, I think, definitionally, that may be an oxymoron. At the least, it's a serious overreach.
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:51 am This is semantics, but it’s also not just semantics. When I google “white supremacy defined,” the first definition I get (Oxford Languages) reads:
the belief that white people constitute a superior race and should therefore dominate society, typically to the exclusion or detriment of other racial and ethnic groups, in particular black or Jewish people.
And IMO that definition changes nothing. I even caveated there was a legitimate question there potentially. One could argue whether there really is a belief or just something that produces the outcomes as if the belief exists. That would matter in the sense it'd change how you tackle it. However, it's clear from the reaction people really have cartoonish beliefs about what white supremacy is and think it's hyperbolic when it is more one motive of many to rationalize the reason for these racist outcomes.
If that definition of white supremacy changes nothing, I don't understand why you're caveating that it's potentially a legitimate question. I feel like maybe we agree that if the current racial inequalities in this country are fueled by continuing white supremacy (because this is a white supremacist nation) as opposed to being built on years of systemic racism, we are going to have to tackle the problem in different ways. So, it seems like common sense to me that there's a distinction to be drawn between groups of people who enjoy the benefits of a racist system and are loathe to give up those benefits and groups of people who truly believe they are entitled to the benefits they are enjoying based on their white superiority.

I'd argue (admittedly without any data to back it up) that there are far more people in the first group than in the second. Which gives me some limited degree of hope. That group - the "I got mine" crowd - may eventually be persuaded, whether it's by establishing that their idea of living in a walled garden is short sighted and not really in their own best interests or, maybe, even by exposing them to the harm the inequalities they benefit from are causing. The white supremacists, on the other hand, are basically unreachable. And, more often than not, so are their children, who are born into that hateful mindset.

Even if we look at something as pernicious as racial gerrymandering, to me, that smacks of power trying to maintain (or acquire greater) power. Is it awful? Of course. Should it be legal? Hell no. Is it unacceptably racially motivated? Definitely. Is it an example of this being a white supremacist nation? Possibly in some jurisdictions, but generally, no.

Or, take another example: Jury selection. Have Blacks been purposefully excluded from juries in some cases since they were first called to serve on juries? Yes. Is it illegal and unacceptably racially motivated? Definitely. Is it an example of this being a white supremacist nation? No. It's an example of lawyers trying to cherry pick a jury that will deliver the verdict they are seeking, notwithstanding the fact that this has had terribly unjust and racist results in incarceration.

How about a cop who routinely pulls over Black drivers more frequently than White drivers? He's racist. He's illegally profiling. Is he necessarily a white supremacist? I don’t think so.
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:51 am White supremacy is a whole different flavor of racism. People can be racist in an uncountable number of ways and for many different reasons. But a true white supremacist is a very specific beast, and, yes, it definitely has a lot to do with the outward belief in the superiority of whiteness. To say that we live in a racist country is one thing. To say we live in a white supremacist country carries a distinctly different meaning.
I disagree. I took pains to explain that I believe we are a nation where it was driven underground but never actually conquered. IMO we still see the signs of it everywhere. It isn't just garden variety racism. And I'd acknowledge that the law of the land as toothless as it is speaks to equality. But it also did when we were an outwardly white supremacist nation.
On this we may have to just disagree. Setting aside the whole de facto v. de jure argument, I think there's far, far more racism in this country than there is white supremacy. Again, I don't have data to back this up. If you want to show me some that supports the notion that we are a nation of white supremacists, I'll certainly take a look and have what's left of my optimism crushed. Maybe you should go kick some puppies while you're at it. :wink:
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:51 am And I agree 100% with LawBeefaroni that no one who’s participating in good faith in a discussion about racial inequality in this country should be leaving the table because of a disagreement over labels. But, at the same time, if we’re trying to get more people to sit at that table and engage, shouldn’t we be trying to use labels that are more accurate and less inflammatory?
If you are taking this as inflammatory that's part of the problem. I'd recommend instead of arguing against the label that you engage on the thought exercise which I laid out.
With respect, your thought exercise didn't make any sense, at least, not as I understood it. You asked to consider a system where equality was the law of the land but the results were consistent with racial preferences year after year. You asked, "Where is the point you have to recognize that it has essentially has blurred the line between what is 'de jure' vs. what is 'de facto'? You can't draw a binary line."

But you can. There is, in fact, a binary line between de jure and de facto. By definition, if the racial inequality is enshrined in law, it's de jure. If it's observed in outcomes, regardless of how consistently and undeniably that observation occurs, then it's de facto.

Maybe I'm fundamentally misunderstanding your point. Or maybe I just don't know what de facto and de jure mean.
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm In the end IMO this type of pushback is solely about feelings. And that to me is good in way. At the end of the day what I've experienced is a lot of white people get angry when they are confronted that what we face is darker than just racism. And getting past this backlash and just constantly proving the case might be the only way to make progress on it. I mean nothing else has really worked. We're almost 60 years from the Voting Rights Act and it's dead. And were seeing so-called racist gerrymanders making it through some systems as we speak. And they mostly are about building durable white control of government in the face of changing demographics.
Of course it's about feelings. Again, confronting people with the racial inequalities their choices lead to seems far more effective to me than trying to force them to accept the fact that they are really, down deep, a bunch of white supremacists. If faced with the fact that they're benefiting from a system that is racially unjust, they may start to feel bad about it, but I'm pretty sure they'll definitely just feel mad if they have people calling them white supremacists. And, in the end, if you really believe the root problem is that these people are truly white supremacists, what are you going to accomplish by pointing that out to them? Do you think they're going to change?
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm
Kurth wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:51 am
If a prerequisite to starting an honest dialogue about racial inequality and systemic racism in this country is agreement that racism is a significant problem in U.S. and, in many respects, the U.S. remains a racist country, I think we can widen the circle and get more people involved. If the prerequisite is agreement that the U.S. is a “white supremacist nation,” I think the circle shrinks significantly.
This is the part of problem. If facing what might be the truth makes people so uncomfortable that we have to play these word games...we're never going to make progress. I mean look at the argument here. To paraphrase, 'we're just racist, people tend to agree on that, stick to it, and maybe more people will engage'. Yet as the argument goes on it'll drives people away when you try to assign a motive to that racism. That's pretty slippery ground and it artificially limits the discussion.
Only if the sole possible motive is that they are white supremacists. If the motive behind that racism is, instead, greed or fear or ignorance, I think that can be a very different and constructive conversation. But you seem to be operating under the assumption that the motivation underlying most racial inequality in the country is white supremacy, which I think is at the root of our disagreement.
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm We seem to all agree that the nation had at some level outward white supremacist periods. Why do we think that is 100% behind us? If it is this notion of 'what does the law say', then how do we address when we see efforts that saw these laws hollowed out and the laws have no meaning or impact anymore? How do we account that white supremacist extremism is one of the fastest growing domestic terrorism issues we face?
I'd never say this country has 100% left white supremacy behind, and the growing threat of white supremacist extremism (which is a great example of what white supremacy really is) highlights that. But that's a far cry from defending the proposition that the U.S. is a "white supremacist nation."
malchior wrote: Thu Mar 31, 2022 12:33 pm It comes down to basic questions. Where does this racism stem from? Is it just baked into the machine and the machine is still stamping out racist outcomes? Or is resisting change to fix it an 'underground' or unsaid expression of white power stemming from a belief they deserve power more than other races? You have to wonder why is it so uniformly distributed against blacks in particular? That is why I think we need to stop pretending we don't have at some level a white supremacy problem at the root of this. Is it *all* white supremacy? No. There are also competing interests but still a blanket denial? When outcomes look a whole lot like what'd happen if we were outwardly white supremacist? That doesn't seem too wise to me.
At this point, it feels like you're kind of moving the goal posts in this discussion. I'm arguing that it's an inflammatory overstatement to say that "the U.S. is a white supremacist country." I've never argued that we don't have a white supremacy problem at some level or that white supremacy doesn't play some role.

And I'm not sure how you can say that the outcomes in the U.S. today - as racially inequitable as many of them are - are anything like the outcomes we've seen from outwardly (de jure) white supremacist countries (e.g., Nazi Germany, apartheid South Africa, the U.S. for much of our history, etc.). Trying to equate the two doesn't seem that wise to me.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

I wrote a long response but the forum ate it. On second thought I don't think my argument will benefit from even more quote decomposition style posting because I think it is muddling things. I think like Lawbeefaroni said this is a hang up about definitions but I still suspect that there is a hyper focus on the white supremacy aspect that is frankly driving irrationality.

But to sum up I was never arguing about a binary between de facto and de jure. I was arguing there was no binary between white supremacist nation and not. If we need to be 51% white supremacists or whatever the threshold might be for some to agree that we meet some national definition of white supremacy, well I disagree.

Instead I think while there is indeed quite a bit of social change we have a system that is after a period of improvement has backslid into delivering similar economic and political influence outcomes as when we were a white supremacist nation. Yes with notable exceptions. I believe there is enough evidence to say we have a level of white supremacy in positions of power. That level is sufficient to prevent reforms and ultimately deliver 'good enough' results for white supremacy. We just had a President who reached down into that cesspool and stirred it, to the point he was openly signaling to them, and was delivering them political victories. They were marching in the open and fighting in the streets. And they are unfortunately more energized, whipped up, and agitating for more power right now. To the point that the ADL has said 2021 was a year where we saw "historically high" levels of white supremacist propaganda. They judge it as resistance to increases in acceptance in diversity in the United States. They've been infiltrating the military and law enforcement per the FBI. In other words, there is likely still too much influence throughout civil government.

We can't push back against this rising tide if we limit ourselves to convincing people that we need to work on racism when someone is actively fighting to maintain it in the shadows. That isn't moving goalposts that is explaining what I mean by 'de facto'. It is a state where white supremacist actors likely maintain influence over policy in the United States to deliver acceptable outcomes that promote/maintain white-centric power.

I'll lastly say there was never any attempt to equate us with any previous white supremacist regime. This is our own version.

Edit: As an aside, I wrote a long passage about how I know this is a problem because someone tried to recruit *me*. In 2008. In Edison, NJ. Because a black man was running for President. It didn't go well but it was like stepping through a door and realizing how big a problem it actually was. I think people underestimate it *massively*. One of my big personal regrets was not reporting that ex-boss to HR. It was smart personally since I had no evidence but I still regret it. I watched him discriminate fairly openly against a black colleague of mine. He is now a senior executive at a *redacted* major tech company. And maybe it's coloring my viewpoint but I'm being transparent here.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43487
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Blackhawk »

I am so lost and confused at this point.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by noxiousdog »

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am Instead I think while there is indeed quite a bit of social change we have a system that is after a period of improvement has backslid into delivering similar economic and political influence outcomes as when we were a white supremacist nation. Yes with notable exceptions.
This is patently false. Just between 1990 and 2018, the life expectancy for blacks improved by 6 years, 3 times times that of whites. Black median income has risen by 1/3 since 1990.

Also, you wonder why I'm so hung up on the "white supremicist' part of the conversation? It's because that was the point I disagreed with! The fundamental argument that it's a racist nation with racist outcomes is pretty much undeniable. But I think Kurth did a better job of explaining that the solutions are different if it's intentional.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 10:58 am
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am Instead I think while there is indeed quite a bit of social change we have a system that is after a period of improvement has backslid into delivering similar economic and political influence outcomes as when we were a white supremacist nation. Yes with notable exceptions.
This is patently false. Just between 1990 and 2018, the life expectancy for blacks improved by 6 years, 3 times times that of whites. Black median income has risen by 1/3 since 1990.
Not patently false. All median incomes rose since 1990. I already thought ahead of this argument when I said it was 'relatively unchanged'. Which is true. All tides rose to maintain relatively consistent inequality. Aka no real progress. Also, comparing black life expectancy to whites is misleading at best. Life expectancy hit a ceiling for all races in the US and blacks caught up. That's great! Was that social change? Access to health care? Less crime? (All of the above). But economically? Political influence? Not so much. Are we seeing their political influence watered down *right now* in racial gerrymanders. Yep. As I conceded that could be for a variety of reasons but it is hard to deny the possibility there is white supremacy in the mix.

Edit: For even more emphasis - WaPo - Titled: The black-white economic divide is as wide as it was in 1968.
As Black Lives Matter protests grow across the nation over policing, the deep economic inequalities that African Americans face are coming to the forefront.

In many ways, the gap between the finances of blacks and whites is still as wide in 2020 as it was in 1968, when a run of landmark civil rights legislation culminated in the Fair Housing Act in response to centuries of unequal treatment of African Americans in nearly every part of society and business.

In the decades since, white wealth has soared while black wealth has stagnated. Many have pointed out the far larger share of white millionaires than black, but even among the middle class, the inequities are stark.
This is what I refer to when I say little progress. It's the facts. This is what I mean by 'de facto' outcomes.
Also, you wonder why I'm so hung up on the "white supremicist' part of the conversation? It's because that was the point I disagreed with!
You keep missing the mark. I'm saying you are focusing so much on the label that you are simply not hearing the argument I am making. Instead it is being twisted into some caricature. I mean your hot take was that I was equating the US to a Nazi or Apartheid regime. Which I have gone to lengths to say was not the intent.
The fundamental argument that it's a racist nation with racist outcomes is pretty much undeniable. But I think Kurth did a better job of explaining that the solutions are different if it's intentional.
Which I 100% agree with. And what I've tried over and over is ask why we dismiss that it is intentional despite a history of it being intentional. That it looks intentional. That people are saying it out loud. That we just had a President who catered to white supremacists. It's baffling that I'm getting this sort of push back to it. I'll say it again - this is bordering on irrational to me.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by noxiousdog »

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 11:14 am All median incomes rose since 1990. I already thought ahead of this argument when I said it was 'relatively unchanged'. Which is true. All tides rose to maintain relatively consistent inequality.
Overal median income has only gone up 20%.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 11:34 am
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 11:14 am All median incomes rose since 1990. I already thought ahead of this argument when I said it was 'relatively unchanged'. Which is true. All tides rose to maintain relatively consistent inequality.
Overal median income has only gone up 20%.
I don't this is saying what you think it is but I did drop in an edit to back up my point. A piece by a national newspaper going into detail echoing what I am arguing. No real progress since 1968. Since the time 'we solved' white supremacy in the United States.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Kurth »

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am I wrote a long response but the forum ate it. On second thought I don't think my argument will benefit from even more quote decomposition style posting because I think it is muddling things.
I’m going to keep with the quote decomposition thing here, only because it’s a new trick I learned late last night while responding to your previous post.
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am I think like Lawbeefaroni said this is a hang up about definitions but I still suspect that there is a hyper focus on the white supremacy aspect that is frankly driving irrationality.
Agreed it’s about definitions, and we have a different definition of what constitutes a “white supremacy nation.” I’m certainly biased, but I think far more people in this country would agree with my definition (focused on intent/philosophy/worldview) than yours (focused on results/outcomes). But even, for argument’s sake, we agreed that reasonable people could disagree about whether this is a “white supremacist nation” or a nation marked by fundamental systemic racism, why insist on using a term that is, in your words, driving irrationality?
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am But to sum up I was never arguing about a binary between de facto and de jure. I was arguing there was no binary between white supremacist nation and not. If we need to be 51% white supremacists or whatever the threshold might be for some to agree that we meet some national definition of white supremacy, well I disagree.
But, obviously, there is a level something like white supremacy has to reach before you can declare that it’s appropriate to define a nation by it. I don’t think anyone is denying that there are persistent, pernicious pockets of white supremacy in this country or that those pockets have been growing for a number of years now and were particularly fueled (with help from the right) by the election of Obama. It’s still a leap to declare the U.S. is a white supremacist nation.
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am Instead I think while there is indeed quite a bit of social change we have a system that is after a period of improvement has backslid into delivering similar economic and political influence outcomes as when we were a white supremacist nation. Yes with notable exceptions. I believe there is enough evidence to say we have a level of white supremacy in positions of power. That level is sufficient to prevent reforms and ultimately deliver 'good enough' results for white supremacy. We just had a President who reached down into that cesspool and stirred it, to the point he was openly signaling to them, and was delivering them political victories. They were marching in the open and fighting in the streets. And they are unfortunately more energized, whipped up, and agitating for more power right now. To the point that the ADL has said 2021 was a year where we saw "historically high" levels of white supremacist propaganda. They judge it as resistance to increases in acceptance in diversity in the United States. They've been infiltrating the military and law enforcement per the FBI. In other words, there is likely still too much influence throughout civil government.
Agree with a lot of what you have here. Doesn’t even strike me as wrong to say we have “a level of white supremacy in position of power.” But that’s not what we were arguing about.

As an aside, I’ve been an active member and supporter of ADL for decades. I’m familiar with their monitoring and reporting on white supremacy in the U.S. and around the world. In fact, maybe my involvement with ADL is what’s triggering me on this issue. What you seem to be calling a “cartoonish” view of white supremacy is the definition I’ve been exposed to and have adopted over years and years of reading reports like With Hate in their Hearts: The State of White Supremacy in the United States. You won’t find the ADL declaring the United States is a “white supremacist nation” in there, and, honestly, I’ve never seen ADL use the term “white supremacy” the way you’re using it.
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am We can't push back against this rising tide if we limit ourselves to convincing people that we need to work on racism when someone is actively fighting to maintain it in the shadows. That isn't moving goalposts that is explaining what I mean by 'de facto'. It is a state where white supremacist actors likely maintain influence over policy in the United States to deliver acceptable outcomes that promote/maintain white-centric power.
This is wrong. We can push back against racism, both systemic and individual, without dumping all forms of racism into the “white supremacist” bucket. At the same time, we should be unceasing in our efforts to call out and expose those who actually are white supremacists, especially when they hold positions of power and use those positions to effectuate racially unjust and inequitable outcomes.

And, to be clear, this isn’t an approach that should do anything to downplay the importance of combatting all forms of racism and our collective responsibility to engage in that effort.
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am I'll lastly say there was never any attempt to equate us with any previous white supremacist regime. This is our own version.
Even if you want to say that the entirety of the GOP and all its members and constituents are white supremacists, which I don’t think you are saying, it would still be far fetched to look at the current regime in the U.S. and say it’s a white supremacist regime. It’s loose talk.
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am Edit: As an aside, I wrote a long passage about how I know this is a problem because someone tried to recruit *me*. In 2008. In Edison, NJ. Because a black man was running for President. It didn't go well but it was like stepping through a door and realizing how big a problem it actually was. I think people underestimate it *massively*. One of my big personal regrets was not reporting that ex-boss to HR. It was smart personally since I had no evidence but I still regret it. I watched him discriminate fairly openly against a black colleague of mine. He is now a senior executive at a *redacted* major tech company. And maybe it's coloring my viewpoint but I'm being transparent here.
Anecdotal evidence, personally lived, can be an extremely strong influence on someone’s viewpoint.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

Kurth wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 11:47 amAgreed it’s about definitions, and we have a different definition of what constitutes a “white supremacy nation.” I’m certainly biased, but I think far more people in this country would agree with my definition (focused on intent/philosophy/worldview) than yours (focused on results/outcomes). But even, for argument’s sake, we agreed that reasonable people could disagree about whether this is a “white supremacist nation” or a nation marked by fundamental systemic racism, why insist on using a term that is, in your words, driving irrationality?
I think this is an inaccurate summation. I'm more saying the outcomes are evidence that white supremacist intents (amongst many) are likely influencing national, state, and local policy. There are other explanations for sure but this is where I wonder why it'd be dismissed considering the history of the United States.

I also don't think that anyone should stop using what might be an accurate terminology because other people are irrational about their own feelings. I already explained why I think it's important to confront problems head on. Even if the response is irrational. Maybe I don't win over (royal) you but maybe it provides wisdom to others in relief.
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 am But to sum up I was never arguing about a binary between de facto and de jure. I was arguing there was no binary between white supremacist nation and not. If we need to be 51% white supremacists or whatever the threshold might be for some to agree that we meet some national definition of white supremacy, well I disagree.
But, obviously, there is a level something like white supremacy has to reach before you can declare that it’s appropriate to define a nation by it. I don’t think anyone is denying that there are persistent, pernicious pockets of white supremacy in this country or that those pockets have been growing for a number of years now and were particularly fueled (with help from the right) by the election of Obama. It’s still a leap to declare the U.S. is a white supremacist nation.
And I think it is irrational to call it a leap. It was the open or open-informal policy of the United States for a lot of our history. I'm not asking anyone to prove a negative but at some level the rejection of the concept out of hand is what I'm baffled by.
Agree with a lot of what you have here. Doesn’t even strike me as wrong to say we have “a level of white supremacy in position of power.” But that’s not what we were arguing about.
That's the thing. That's what I'm arguing! It's the whole point. And I'm just arguing I expect it is at a level that enables producing certain outcomes that are tantamount to what might happen if we were an out in the 'open' white supremacy. That's my whole thesis in a nutshell.
As an aside, I’ve been an active member and supporter of ADL for decades. I’m familiar with their monitoring and reporting on white supremacy in the U.S. and around the world. In fact, maybe my involvement with ADL is what’s triggering me on this issue. What you seem to be calling a “cartoonish” view of white supremacy is the definition I’ve been exposed to and have adopted over years and years of reading reports like With Hate in their Hearts: The State of White Supremacy in the United States. You won’t find the ADL declaring the United States is a “white supremacist nation” in there, and, honestly, I’ve never seen ADL use the term “white supremacy” the way you’re using it.
Judging by this level of irrationality as I see it I suspect I know why they wouldn't use the term even if they thought it. It is sort of like when people say Israel is a 'de facto' apartheid state. There is some room to argue there and to be clear I'm not taking that position here. However, even trying to have that discussion leads to people getting shouted down the moment they go down that line. I would hope in a rational world we'd be able to have that discussion without people leaping to what I've seen here trying to boil all the grey away into hard black/white lines.

What I'm hearing is a lot like, "How dare you call the United States a 'white supremacist' nation! We've come so far!" And while I'd agree in part we've improved but it still looks pretty bad. When I step back and ponder through the root causes I keep coming back to the fact that we were a white supremacist nation. And I'd further argue that somehow many perhaps have lied to themselves and have become convinced we're beyond it.
This is wrong. We can push back against racism, both systemic and individual, without dumping all forms of racism into the “white supremacist” bucket.
This again feels inaccurate to me. Point at one statement where I said all racism is white supremacy. I'm saying that white supremacy through people in positions of authority is in the mix and is even possibly the dominant influence on certain *policy elements* and therefore outcomes. I'd even almost say likely because it looks as if there was still a targeted effort against blacks (in particular).

Even if you want to say that the entirety of the GOP and all its members and constituents are white supremacists, which I don’t think you are saying, it would still be far fetched to look at the current regime in the U.S. and say it’s a white supremacist regime. It’s loose talk.
It's not loose talk. I'm defining it fairly tightly. Economic, judicial, and political influence outcomes. It's even testable. On the economics front we ended red-lining, passed consumer protection laws, we desegrated schools, etc. yet somehow 52 years later the wealth divide is no better. That doesn't seem like a random accident of history.

On the political influence front there are the racial gerrymanders. I don't think that is entirely just about power politics. We have a decent pool of data indicating backlash to diversity initiatives drives white voters. Politicians especially recently have full on started to embrace white nationalist leaders and we have members of Congress openly going to their events. It's supposedly the fringe but even then the mainstream GOP members can't be pinned into denouncing it. Like I said I'm sort of baffled by this response when we have so many indicators it could be true.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Kurth »

I think this horse has been beaten and is well and truly dead at this point. I don't have anything more to add to this. I think it's pretty clear where we disagree and where we're on the same page. I've enjoyed the conversation.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
Madmarcus
Posts: 3609
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Just outside your peripheral vision

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Madmarcus »

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 12:38 pm It's even testable. On the economics front we ended red-lining, passed consumer protection laws, we desegrated schools, etc. yet somehow 52 years later the wealth divide is no better. That doesn't seem like a random accident of history.
Why not? It feels like a perfectly normal outcome in a situation where economic mobility is possible but not easy and an initial advantage exists. Reading your post made me recognize that I view racism and supremacy in very different terms. I see the continued economic gap and I tend to think in terms of racism and fairness. I have a lot of friends who are racist. They don't care about race, skin color, or national origin really but they are staunchly neoliberal and desire policies that protect economic privilege. It comes down to issues of individualism versus community and to the ethics and morality of unequal outcomes based on unequal starting points. I have my answers to these questions but I do not feel that there is one universal answer.

On the other hand I see white supremacy in terms of justice; an active desire to make the outcomes different for different races or national origins. While I can understand a feeling that the world doesn't need to be fair as a possible ethical or moral stand I feel an unjust world view is indefensible. There is certainly a strand of that in US politics and society. It has certainly gotten stronger in recent years. But I don't quite think it is big enough to say we are a nation currently set up as a white supremacy. We were and it's very scary to see that we might be headed back that way based on politics but I don't think we are there yet. In fact I worry that saying we are a nation of white supremacy will lead to normalizing a minority view.

BTW, I could convince myself to flip the words justice and fairness in this. Which probably weakens my point but still has the same idea that I feel it is important to keep the intentionality in mind.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

Kurth wrote: Fri Apr 01, 2022 1:44 pm I think this horse has been beaten and is well and truly dead at this point. I don't have anything more to add to this. I think it's pretty clear where we disagree and where we're on the same page. I've enjoyed the conversation.
Indeed - the same.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

stessier wrote: Tue Mar 29, 2022 11:59 am From the description
White people say they’re ready to listen and learn, but Black people have been saying the same thing for centuries. Jon talks to Race2Dinner’s Resident White Person™ Lisa Bond, Yale professor Chip Gallagher, and writer Andrew Sullivan about how white Americans can take responsibility for upholding racist systems. It goes about as well as you’d expect.
Sullivan predictably went full snowflake and apparently went to complain to an outlet that looks like it published Sullivan's now apparently contested allegations without getting a comment from Stewart to set it straight.

User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Kurth »

Such a clear example of someone who embarrassed himself trying to go on the offense. Honestly, watching that Jon Stewart segment again, I can’t imagine why anyone other than Fox or OAN would ever want to hear from him again.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43487
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Blackhawk »

I read Sullivan's complaint article. He straight up said that he didn't bother to read the email with the details, and that he was given a chance to back out once he found out later and decided not to.

He didn't just not read the fine print, he barely skimmed the headline. It's 100% on him.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Grifman »

Black Houses Matter:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/04 ... house.html
None of the women acknowledged the house behind them. It’s far from a box, with more than 6,500 square feet, more than half a dozen bedrooms and bathrooms, several fireplaces, a soundstage, a pool and bungalow, and parking for more than 20 cars, according to real-estate listings. The California property was purchased for nearly $6 million in cash in October 2020 with money that had been donated to BLMGNF.

The transaction has not been previously reported, and Black Lives Matter’s leadership had hoped to keep the house’s existence a secret. Documents, emails, and other communications I’ve seen about the luxury property’s purchase and day-to-day operation suggest that it has been handled in ways that blur, or cross, boundaries between the charity and private companies owned by some of its leaders. It creates the impression that money donated to the cause of racial justice has been spent in ways that benefit the leaders of Black Lives Matter personally.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Kurth »

Grifman wrote: Tue Apr 05, 2022 12:47 am Black Houses Matter:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/04 ... house.html
None of the women acknowledged the house behind them. It’s far from a box, with more than 6,500 square feet, more than half a dozen bedrooms and bathrooms, several fireplaces, a soundstage, a pool and bungalow, and parking for more than 20 cars, according to real-estate listings. The California property was purchased for nearly $6 million in cash in October 2020 with money that had been donated to BLMGNF.

The transaction has not been previously reported, and Black Lives Matter’s leadership had hoped to keep the house’s existence a secret. Documents, emails, and other communications I’ve seen about the luxury property’s purchase and day-to-day operation suggest that it has been handled in ways that blur, or cross, boundaries between the charity and private companies owned by some of its leaders. It creates the impression that money donated to the cause of racial justice has been spent in ways that benefit the leaders of Black Lives Matter personally.
Some things definitely transcend race.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Isgrimnur »

WYBaugh wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 1:17 pm Ah sweet, sweet justice for this pos

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/08/us/black ... index.html
(CNN)A 22-year-old woman has been arrested in California more than a week after falsely accusing the teenage son of a Black jazz musician of taking her iPhone in a heated confrontation caught on video.
If you haven't watched the video, check it out. Freakin' crazy.
NBC News
The California woman dubbed "SoHo Karen" after she wrongly accused a Black teenager of stealing her cellphone in New York City has pleaded guilty to a hate crime charge, officials said Monday.

Miya Ponsetto, 23, has admitted to unlawful imprisonment "as a hate crime" but can re-plead and have the charge reduced to misdemeanor aggravated harassment if she steers clear of any trouble for two years, Manhattan prosecutors said.
...
The New York case piggybacks on a previous DUI case in California in which Ponsetto is serving probation and undergoing counseling.

Ponsetto, a receptionist in Southern California, is grateful for the deal, her attorney Paul D’Emilia said.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Grifman »

Dallas has a separate school system for rich white people (see thread):

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
coopasonic
Posts: 20966
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Dallas-ish

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by coopasonic »

My son's high school football team played Highland Park year before last, My son is in marching band, so we went for the half time show mostly. I was not really familiar with Highland Park other than knowing it is where the money lives. I commented to my wife partway through the game that it was kind of odd that their football team was almost completely white.


https://www.usnews.com/education/best-h ... hool-19221
82.5% White
7.5% Asian
6.3% Hispanic
2.5% Two or More Races
0.7% Black
0.4% American Indian/Alaska Native
0.1% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
Considering the diversity in DFW, that's... interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demograph ... Fort_Worth
As of the 2020 United States census, there were 7,637,387 people. The racial makeup of the MSA was 50.2% White, 15.4% African American, 0.6% Native American, 5.9% Asian, 0.1% Pacific Islander, 10.0% from other races, and 2.4% from two or more races.
-Coop
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Isgrimnur »

And University Park next door:

Image
HPISD had no racial diversity in the 1950s and 1960s, when other Dallas-area school districts dealt with racial integration and white flight. The federal court orders to integrate had no effect in HPISD since it did not receive federal money
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Grifman »

This is absolutely horrifying;

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

The screen says otherwise:
"GET DRUNK, HIGH & HOT"
Kelly is kind of turned on.

At any rate, it's Newsmax. Wouldn't expect anything different from that cesspool of hate.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by malchior »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:04 amAt any rate, it's Newsmax. Wouldn't expect anything different from that cesspool of hate.
Luckily still available on most cable and streaming providers.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

malchior wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:21 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:04 amAt any rate, it's Newsmax. Wouldn't expect anything different from that cesspool of hate.
Luckily still available on most cable and streaming providers.
Probably because the fees are near zero. Essentially free content for the providers.

It is indeed a sad commentary on the current state of media content and disinformation consumption
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by hepcat »

Speaking of media: far right extremists were big fans of The Boys... until they realized it's satirizing them. :lol:

Warning: article contains spoilers for episode 5
Covfefe!
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Holman »

malchior wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:52 am
I'd ask for even one example of a drunken riot inspired by Juneteenth.

Meanwhile, Mr. Kelly, let's talk St. Patrick's Day...
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Or July 4.

But I'm sure their definition of a "riot" is any time a group of nonwhites congregate and refuse to disperse when demanded to do so by some angry TikToker/'grammer.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 63524
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Daehawk »

Trevor comes across damn smart and the interviewer as someone who has an agenda to push.

--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Grifman »

“I am not racist . . . “

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by hepcat »

I can't imagine how angry he must have been when that asshat started going after his daughter in that letter. It's a testament to his humanity that he didn't start going door to door to find that piece of human excrement.
Covfefe!
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

That letter is 100% believable to me but not being Twitter savvy, cannot tell if it is real. Seems almost too perfectly awful.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Smoove_B »

I'm old enough to remember shortly after 9/11 when there were cries that various religious centers throughout the NYC/NJ area should be out saying their religion isn't a religion of terror - that temple leaders needed to condemn the violence that was allegedly perpetrated in the name of their god and that those individuals were misguided and misrepresenting the core message of the beliefs or the majority of the people following that religion.

Funny how the same thing isn't happening now to the various Christian organizations - whether its racism, abortion, guns, migrants/refugees -- no one seems to be demanding that large Christian organizations also speak out against these things and denounce the religious fundamentalists that have hijacked Christianity.

Weird, right?
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Unagi »

Maybe the pilots never had to change their flight plan.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by hepcat »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 2:16 pm That letter is 100% believable to me but not being Twitter savvy, cannot tell if it is real. Seems almost too perfectly awful.
Yeah, this. More than once I've seen one of these things, felt my blood starting to boil, then learned it was a fake. :oops:
Covfefe!
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Racism in America (with data)

Post by Isgrimnur »

CNN
Travis McMichael, one of the three White men convicted in the killing of Ahmaud Arbery, was sentenced Monday to life in prison plus 10 years after his federal convictions this year on interference with rights -- a hate crime -- along with attempted kidnapping and weapon use charges.

His father Gregory McMichael and their neighbor William "Roddie" Bryan are due to be sentenced later Monday at the same Georgia courthouse on convictions of the same federal charges. All three already are serving life sentences for their convictions in state court on a series of charges related to the killing of the 25-year-old Black man, including felony murder.
...
Travis McMichael's life sentence, along with 20 years on the attempted kidnapping charge, is to be served concurrently with his state sentence, US District Court Judge Lisa Godbey Wood ruled Monday, with the additional 10 years on the weapons charge to be served consecutively. The judge ruled McMichael did not have the funds to pay a fine.

McMichael's attorney Amy Lee Copeland argued Monday for her client to remain in federal custody and to serve out his prison term with the Federal Bureau of Prisons rather than the Georgia Department of Corrections.

McMichael fears for his life in a state prison, Copeland said, telling the court he'd received "hundreds" of threats. Forcing him to serve the time in a Georgia state prison would essentially amount to a "backdoor death penalty" that could leave McMichael vulnerable to "vigilante justice," she argued, acknowledging the "rich irony."
It's almost as if people are the problem.
Post Reply