|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On April 29 2015 01:49 YoureFired wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:29 travis wrote:
[quote]
Please explain what you mean by that because I don't see the problem with what I said - and the tone that you interpret may not necessarily be the tone I intended (which really was no tone at all it was supposed to be as to the point as possible). If you don't even have a clue what it is I can't help you in a couple short posts and I don't have the patience or desire to walk you through an entire course on oppression and privilege. Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. That's what's dangerous about our New Racism/Colorblind Racism. You don't have to do ANYTHING besides submit to the status quo, which benefits White people and disproportionately hurts Black people and other communities of color. Racism is no longer saying the N-Word, it is 10% of Black men aged 18-22 being behind bars and the White community saying "well, look at all those criminals!" without recognizing that those incarceration rates were achieved by overpolicing and racist sentencing (Black men are 3x more likely than White men to go to jail for the SAME amount of weed)
yeah but the trend i notice time and time again is "guilty of that mindset until proven innocent, simply because you are white". and that trend proved itself again in this thread.
|
On April 29 2015 01:34 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed deeply divided about one of the great civil rights issues of the age: whether the Constitution guarantees same-sex couples the right to marry.
The justices appeared to clash over not only what is the right answer but also over how to reach it. The questioning illuminated their conflicting views on history, tradition, biology, constitutional interpretation, the democratic process and the role of the courts in prodding social change.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said he was concerned about changing a conception of marriage that has persisted for millennia. Later, though, he expressed qualms about excluding gay families from what he called a noble and sacred institution. Chief Justice John C. Roberts Jr. worried about shutting down a fast-moving societal debate.
In the initial questioning, which lasted about 90 minutes, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. asked whether groups of four people must be allowed to marry, while Justice Antonin Scalia said a ruling for same-sex marriage might require some members of the clergy to perform the ceremonies, even if they violate their religious teaching.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer described marriage as a fundamental liberty. And Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan said that allowing same-sex marriage would do no harm to the marriages of opposite-sex couples.
Until recently, the court has been cautious and halting in addressing same-sex marriage, signaling that it did not want to outpace public support and developments in the states. Now, though, a definitive decision will probably be handed down in about two months.
At the start of Tuesday’s arguments, Chief Justice Roberts said that he had looked up definitions of marriage and had been unable to find one written before a dozen years ago that did not define it as between a man and a woman. “If you succeed, that definition will not be operable,” the Chief Justice said. “You are not seeking to join the institution. You are seeking to change the institution.”
Justice Kennedy, who many consider the likely swing vote on the case, weighed in with skepticism as the advocates for gay marriage made their case. He said the definition of marriage “has been with us for millennia.”
“It’s very difficult for the court to say, ‘Oh, we know better,’ ” he said. NYTVery telling questions from the justices. I see some viewpoints routinely marginalized in the public square being voiced here.
It's always been this way, so that must be best right? A great many tragic things have come from sticking to tradition at all costs. I would hope that the Supreme Court would think of it as the equal rights decision that it is, rather than considering the viewpoints of families that are not even affected by the decision.
|
On April 29 2015 01:49 YoureFired wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:29 travis wrote:
[quote]
Please explain what you mean by that because I don't see the problem with what I said - and the tone that you interpret may not necessarily be the tone I intended (which really was no tone at all it was supposed to be as to the point as possible). If you don't even have a clue what it is I can't help you in a couple short posts and I don't have the patience or desire to walk you through an entire course on oppression and privilege. Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. That's what's dangerous about our New Racism/Colorblind Racism. You don't have to do ANYTHING besides submit to the status quo, which benefits White people and disproportionately hurts Black people and other communities of color. Racism is no longer saying the N-Word, it is 10% of Black men aged 18-22 being behind bars and the White community saying "well, look at all those criminals!" without recognizing that those incarceration rates were achieved by overpolicing and racist sentencing (Black men are 3x more likely than White men to go to jail for the SAME amount of weed)
Being color blind is racism now? Who's the fucking retard that came up with that idiotic idea?
Again, good luck getting any support from the very people that you're demonizing.
|
On April 29 2015 01:25 Mercy13 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 01:15 Ghostcom wrote:On April 29 2015 01:00 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 00:55 Ghostcom wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:
[quote]
Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." Are you seriously arguing that the validity of a statement is not dependent on what is being said but rather on who said it? EDIT: Also, do you have any statistics to back up the bolded? Preferably some where they control for social status. My argument is essentially that it's morally irresponsible for people/the media to freak out about rioting and call for non-violence, when they more or less ignore violence perpetrated by police and local authorities. Following this line of thought it is incredibly easy to argue that the black community is morally irresponsible for freaking out over e.g. the Trayvon Martin case as they ignore the massively disproportionate black-on-white violence and crime. EDIT: It should be obvious that I do not actually hold this position, but just to make it clear: I DO NOT HOLD THIS POSITION. What massively disproportionate black-on-white violence and crime? Edit: also, in case you didn't see it, I posted a couple sources above.
I saw your sources, thank you  I'm afraid they are worse than what I found as I found a short review article written for journalists which refers to (amongst others) your sources as well as other studies.
Source
I'm going to quote just the conclusion of the paragraph concerning race here, but I encourage people to actually read the article.
A 2010 paper published in the Southwestern Journal of Criminal Justice reviewed more than a decade’s worth of peer-reviewed studies and found that while many studies established a correlation between minority status and police use of force, many other studies did not — and some showed mixed results. Of note in this research literature is a 2003 paper, “Neighborhood Context and Police Use of Force,” that suggests police are more likely to employ force in higher-crime neighborhoods generally, complicating any easy interpretation of race as the decisive factor in explaining police forcefulness. The researchers, William Terrill of Northeastern University and Michael D. Reisig of Michigan State University, found that “officers are significantly more likely to use higher levels of force when encountering criminal suspects in high crime areas and neighborhoods with high levels of concentrated disadvantage independent of suspect behavior and other statistical controls.” Terrill and Reisig explore several hypothetical explanations and ultimately conclude: Embedded within each of these potential explanations is the influence of key sociodemographic variables such as race, class, gender, and age. As the results show, when these factors are considered at the encounter level, they are significant. However, the race (i.e., minority) effect is mediated by neighborhood context. Perhaps officers do not simply label minority suspects according to what Skolnick (1994) termed “symbolic assailants,” as much as they label distressed socioeconomic neighborhoods as potential sources of conflict. In studying the Seattle and Miami police departments, the authors of the 2010 National Institute of Justice report also conclude that “non-white suspects were less likely to be injured than white suspects … where suspect race was available as a variable for analysis. Although we cannot speculate as to the cause of this finding, or whether it is merely spurious, it is encouraging that minority suspects were not more likely to be injured than whites.”
EDIT: Forgot to actually provide you with a source for the white on black crime rate - it is in the 2010 national crime victimization survey report - but as I don't consider the line of logic viable at all and it was simply meant as an example of why the validity of a statement should not depend on who uttered it I'll leave it at this.
EDIT2: The Lived experience argument is so worthless why does it keep on living?! My lived experience of my last DOTA2 game was that I was playing like Burning (aka flawless) and everyone else were 5-year old dolts without hands and brains. (I.e. everyone is biased towards themselves).
|
On April 29 2015 01:37 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2015 13:30 IgnE wrote:On April 27 2015 09:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On April 27 2015 08:01 WhiteDog wrote:As I just said I'm not talking about the early days of communism. I'm talking about communism from start until its finish. You could face severe penalties for failing to meet the Gosplan's requirements, even in the 1980's. Same with China, Korea, and more recently in Venezuela. And how is that socialist ? Especially when you know that most socialists were killed way before. Just to give you some perspective on history, Victor Serge died in 1945 - so obviously he wrote what I just quoted you before that. He also wrote that the party of trotsky and lenin had been executed, in 1936... But sure, 1980 is socialism in practice right. The main problem is that communism and socialism are essentially belief systems masquerading as economic systems. That's your belief talking here right ? By the way, capitalism is the same exact thing, a belief system. And it does not work well either considering all the institutions we had to create in order to regulate it, and it still fuck up big time. As for socialism in a 'local perspective' there is no such thing of any relevance. You can find all sorts of successful diversity in modern capitalism, but you will rarely find some form of success that is universally applicable. Sure sure, again that's your belief talking. Implying that practical problems can be addressed by removing said people... one way or another. Which is exactly what communists did in the past. Sure, continue talking alone. It's nice to be a jonny, you can do the interpretation, the answers and everything that goes with it. Capitalism is not a belief system. You actually do things, and actually look at how things work in real life. It changes and evolves based on evidence. But I'm not going to convince you of that any more than I'm going to convince a religious fundamentalist to change their mind. Lol jonny. "Communism" and "socialism" are belief systems but "capitalism" is basically a science that "changes and evolves." How are you taken seriously? So back in the 17th century you would have said that liberal democracy was untested and unproven, with only failure to blot its record, and that the bourgeoisie merchants were upstart leeches who were immoral, while the landed gentry system had evolved throughout the centuries to keep the peace and bring prosperity to every nation under god. Zzzz. Talk about fundamentalism while trotting out uncritical and ignorant arguments about the supposed "failures" of socialism as if Stalin and Mao voided any critique of capital, and that anyone attempting to argue otherwise needs to put forward a 500 point alternative rather than laying out reasonable and reasonably apparent principles upon which to build one. Why wouldn't I be? I'm pretty well educated and informed on the topics As for the validity of the statement, just go back and read the past few years worth of discussion on these threads. I think Sam said it best when he insisted that Marxists had no answers, just questions, and assured me that the answers would be found... someday. The funny thing is that, in the modern capitalist society we have today no one will stop you from trying to practice socialism. If you want to start a worker coop, you can do that. If you want to bank at a credit union or buy insurance from a mutual, you can do that too. You have a myriad of options for engaging in economic activity 'socially' and the ones that work really well are free to become popular and integrate into the overall economy. And I never said you can't critique capitalism. I tried to state just the opposite actually. It is not a belief system; therefore as the facts change it can adapt and change too.
Iteration is a good thing. Take what works and keep what works. Have certain jurisdictions try new things. What we have right now is the best iteration of economic ideas thus far.
|
On April 29 2015 00:43 Mercy13 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:29 travis wrote:
[quote]
Please explain what you mean by that because I don't see the problem with what I said - and the tone that you interpret may not necessarily be the tone I intended (which really was no tone at all it was supposed to be as to the point as possible). If you don't even have a clue what it is I can't help you in a couple short posts and I don't have the patience or desire to walk you through an entire course on oppression and privilege. Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. I honestly have no clue what point you are trying to make.
The point is, is that if police brutality is the problem, Travis wasn't the cause. If the riots really are about police being assholes, why are random white people being targeted? The business owners aren't going around shooting innocent people or letting people die in the back of their car. So why burn businesses? The answer is because the mob is just as racist as the cops they hate. "Those business owners are white, ergo they're the problem." That's how the rioters and looters see it.
|
On April 29 2015 02:25 xDaunt wrote:
Being color blind is racism now? Who's the fucking retard that came up with that idiotic idea?
Again, good luck getting any support from the very people that you're demonizing.
Not sure if "colourblind" really the label you want to claim for yourself, when you were the one earlier that stipulated the tea party could not be racist because they supported a black person named Hermann Cain.
|
On April 29 2015 02:44 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 00:43 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:35 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
If you don't even have a clue what it is I can't help you in a couple short posts and I don't have the patience or desire to walk you through an entire course on oppression and privilege. Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. I honestly have no clue what point you are trying to make. The point is, is that if police brutality is the problem, Travis wasn't the cause. If the riots really are about police being assholes, why are random white people being targeted? The business owners aren't going around shooting innocent people or letting people die in the back of their car. So why burn businesses? The answer is because the mob is just as racist as the cops they hate. "Those business owners are white, ergo they're the problem." That's how the rioters and looters see it.
As we stated before, the riots are caused by a disenfranchised group being disenfranchised for decades and not one doing anything about it. When the police straight up get someone killed and there is zero legal recourse, something is wrong.
Everyone would like the violence to stop, but not if everything is just going to go back the way things were. The government of that state and city has failed its people for decades.
|
On April 29 2015 02:51 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 02:25 xDaunt wrote:
Being color blind is racism now? Who's the fucking retard that came up with that idiotic idea?
Again, good luck getting any support from the very people that you're demonizing. Not sure if "colourblind" really the label you want to claim for yourself, when you were the one earlier that stipulated the tea party could not be racist because they supported a black person named Hermann Cain.
Then again, he is not - he is arguing against the notion that unless we massively favour minorities then we are supposedly suppressing them.
|
On April 29 2015 02:53 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 02:44 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:43 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:
[quote]
Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. I honestly have no clue what point you are trying to make. The point is, is that if police brutality is the problem, Travis wasn't the cause. If the riots really are about police being assholes, why are random white people being targeted? The business owners aren't going around shooting innocent people or letting people die in the back of their car. So why burn businesses? The answer is because the mob is just as racist as the cops they hate. "Those business owners are white, ergo they're the problem." That's how the rioters and looters see it. As we stated before, the riots are caused by a disenfranchised group being disenfranchised for decades and not one doing anything about it. When the police straight up get someone killed and there is zero legal recourse, something is wrong. Everyone would like the violence to stop, but not if everything is just going to go back the way things were. The government of that state and city has failed its people for decades.
Again, police are the problem, not random business owners. Why are they burning the businesses down? Do they not realize this will only make their neighborhoods poorer?
If they have to burn anything down, it should be the police dept and city hall. Not random businesses who did nothing wrong.
|
When there is such a huge disparity in outcomes, supporting the status quo is actually pretty close to suppression.
A civilised society must strive to be better than this, and the whole personal responsibility crowd, is missing the mark: you can not pull yourself up by the bootstraps from the quicksand.
On April 29 2015 03:01 Millitron wrote:
Again, police are the problem, not random business owners. Why are they burning the businesses down? Do they not realize this will only make their neighborhoods poorer?
If they have to burn anything down, it should be the police dept and city hall. Not random businesses who did nothing wrong.
So emotionally invested and provoked people in suffering behave not perfectly rational? How could this ever happen? I thought that was impossible under your assumptions about humans (perfect information, rational actors).
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i neglected to spell out the very simple consequence of recognizing the deplorable state of life for black americans because i thought it would be obvious.
this does not mean actual crimes committed by blacks should receive favorable treatment. rather, it is to recognize a racially disparate social problem and take action to correct it. substantial social investment is necessary to correct historical lack of social resources. reparation is also possible but not necessary. basic income is okish.
need for reform to justice system is clear and immediate.
|
On April 29 2015 02:44 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 00:43 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:35 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
If you don't even have a clue what it is I can't help you in a couple short posts and I don't have the patience or desire to walk you through an entire course on oppression and privilege. Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. I honestly have no clue what point you are trying to make. The point is, is that if police brutality is the problem, Travis wasn't the cause. If the riots really are about police being assholes, why are random white people being targeted? The business owners aren't going around shooting innocent people or letting people die in the back of their car. So why burn businesses? The answer is because the mob is just as racist as the cops they hate. "Those business owners are white, ergo they're the problem." That's how the rioters and looters see it.
So?
On April 29 2015 02:27 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 01:25 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 01:15 Ghostcom wrote:On April 29 2015 01:00 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 00:55 Ghostcom wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand.
I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." Are you seriously arguing that the validity of a statement is not dependent on what is being said but rather on who said it? EDIT: Also, do you have any statistics to back up the bolded? Preferably some where they control for social status. My argument is essentially that it's morally irresponsible for people/the media to freak out about rioting and call for non-violence, when they more or less ignore violence perpetrated by police and local authorities. Following this line of thought it is incredibly easy to argue that the black community is morally irresponsible for freaking out over e.g. the Trayvon Martin case as they ignore the massively disproportionate black-on-white violence and crime. EDIT: It should be obvious that I do not actually hold this position, but just to make it clear: I DO NOT HOLD THIS POSITION. What massively disproportionate black-on-white violence and crime? Edit: also, in case you didn't see it, I posted a couple sources above. I saw your sources, thank you I'm afraid they are worse than what I found as I found a short review article written for journalists which refers to (amongst others) your sources as well as other studies. SourceI'm going to quote just the conclusion of the paragraph concerning race here, but I encourage people to actually read the article. Show nested quote + A 2010 paper published in the Southwestern Journal of Criminal Justice reviewed more than a decade’s worth of peer-reviewed studies and found that while many studies established a correlation between minority status and police use of force, many other studies did not — and some showed mixed results. Of note in this research literature is a 2003 paper, “Neighborhood Context and Police Use of Force,” that suggests police are more likely to employ force in higher-crime neighborhoods generally, complicating any easy interpretation of race as the decisive factor in explaining police forcefulness. The researchers, William Terrill of Northeastern University and Michael D. Reisig of Michigan State University, found that “officers are significantly more likely to use higher levels of force when encountering criminal suspects in high crime areas and neighborhoods with high levels of concentrated disadvantage independent of suspect behavior and other statistical controls.” Terrill and Reisig explore several hypothetical explanations and ultimately conclude: Embedded within each of these potential explanations is the influence of key sociodemographic variables such as race, class, gender, and age. As the results show, when these factors are considered at the encounter level, they are significant. However, the race (i.e., minority) effect is mediated by neighborhood context. Perhaps officers do not simply label minority suspects according to what Skolnick (1994) termed “symbolic assailants,” as much as they label distressed socioeconomic neighborhoods as potential sources of conflict. In studying the Seattle and Miami police departments, the authors of the 2010 National Institute of Justice report also conclude that “non-white suspects were less likely to be injured than white suspects … where suspect race was available as a variable for analysis. Although we cannot speculate as to the cause of this finding, or whether it is merely spurious, it is encouraging that minority suspects were not more likely to be injured than whites.” EDIT: Forgot to actually provide you with a source for the white on black crime rate - it is in the 2010 national crime victimization survey report - but as I don't consider the line of logic viable at all and it was simply meant as an example of why the validity of a statement should not depend on who uttered it I'll leave it at this. EDIT2: The Lived experience argument is so worthless why does it keep on living?! My lived experience of my last DOTA2 game was that I was playing like Burning (aka flawless) and everyone else were 5-year old dolts without hands and brains. (I.e. everyone is biased towards themselves).
My sources were from FBI date and the Department of Justice, so I'm not sure what makes them objectively worse than what you posted... Anyway, your article includes the following statement:
So I guess what you posted is consistent with what I posted?
|
Oh dear fucking lord you must be trolling now!
EDIT:
To answer your edit (your prior post stopped at the "so?" which was what warrented the above):
Your sources were worse because they did not adjust for well-known confounders. The article I linked and quoted actually used those as part of its references while also entering the field of whether or not it was actually racism or if race was simply a proxy for poor societal status. Your quote is indeed taken from the article, but as it continues with what I quoted in my prior post it becomes obvious that race is not the issue. Social class is.
|
On April 29 2015 03:02 puerk wrote:
When there is such a huge disparity in outcomes, supporting the status quo is actually pretty close to suppression.
A civilised society must strive to be better than this, and the whole personal responsibility crowd, is missing the mark: you can not pull yourself up by the bootstraps from the quicksand.
And who is supporting the status quo? Those that continually apologize for why certain minorities have it rough and always advocate they be given some special assistance as a band aid certainly are.
|
On April 29 2015 03:01 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 02:53 Plansix wrote:On April 29 2015 02:44 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:43 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand.
I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. I honestly have no clue what point you are trying to make. The point is, is that if police brutality is the problem, Travis wasn't the cause. If the riots really are about police being assholes, why are random white people being targeted? The business owners aren't going around shooting innocent people or letting people die in the back of their car. So why burn businesses? The answer is because the mob is just as racist as the cops they hate. "Those business owners are white, ergo they're the problem." That's how the rioters and looters see it. As we stated before, the riots are caused by a disenfranchised group being disenfranchised for decades and not one doing anything about it. When the police straight up get someone killed and there is zero legal recourse, something is wrong. Everyone would like the violence to stop, but not if everything is just going to go back the way things were. The government of that state and city has failed its people for decades. Again, police are the problem, not random business owners. Why are they burning the businesses down? Do they not realize this will only make their neighborhoods poorer? If they have to burn anything down, it should be the police dept and city hall. Not random businesses who did nothing wrong.
What is your point? I said the riots were bad, but I pointed out that the government in that area is as bad and has been for longer.
Do you not understand that the people in this city are so hopeless than they believe it cannot get better? That burning their own neighborhoods holds no meaning to them because they feel they have nothing to lose. They live in an area where they could get arrested and die in custody and nothing would be done about it.
|
On April 29 2015 03:05 Mercy13 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 02:44 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:43 Mercy13 wrote:On April 29 2015 00:39 Millitron wrote:On April 29 2015 00:04 Mercy13 wrote:On April 28 2015 15:08 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 15:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:51 travis wrote:On April 28 2015 14:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 28 2015 14:38 travis wrote:
[quote]
Well I suspect that the actual truth is that you are afraid that if you try to explain what you meant my reply will make you look silly. Otherwise I invite you to do so because you called me out but aren't willing to follow through. Like I said if you really want to understand you can start by answering why Freddie Gray was arrested and why/how his neck was broken. Otherwise I can't really believe you want to understand. I am not sure why he was arrested. I don't think an official reason has been given. If you are going to say that it is because the police were harassing him, then I would agree that this is an entirely possible cause. It may have had some sort of legitimate basis but as far as I can tell why he was arrested isn't really the main issue here. How was his spine severed? They probably beat him to death. Ok so a guy was arrested and beaten weeks ago then died and the police haven't been able to so much as give a reason as to why he was arrested let alone how or why his neck was broken. Yet you can go to any news source and get the information you're looking for so you don't have to worry about imaginary stabbings on your way to school (like seriously where do you even get that shit from?). Meanwhile a family and the residents of Baltimore have to wait weeks to hear something as simple as what the preliminary justification for his arrest was (which the police are required by law to have at the time of the arrest) or how/when the mans neck was broken while in police custody, or how/why they didn't call for the prescribed medical treatment they are expected to do under their procedures. And you still can't see it? If you think it's not dangerous for a white guy to walk to Lexington Market, ride the metro from Lexington Market to Mondawmin, and then walk from Mondawmin to Baltimore City Community College right now, then you don't know much about Baltimore and probably shouldn't be commenting on what I said. I've been riding the metro here for a year. There is rarely another white person on the metro. It's been cool, I don't feel unsafe, even though I know people are often thinking "look, a white guy". And that's fine. But right now there are a lot of angry people, and a lot of thugs out looking to cause trouble and to pick fights. I know a lone white guy would make a great target. Actually I would put odds at me getting stabbed today if I got caught at Mondawmin at the wrong time. Thankfully I didn't have class so I didn't go out. A white student at my Fiance's school 2 blocks from here actually was attacked just outside the school. And that's a much safer area. White people have been targeted by some angry black people. You don't want to go to the wrong places right now. This is reality. If you don't know about it, rather than acting like I am making up wild fantasies, maybe you should ask me for more information. The reason statements like this are problematic is because it completely ignores the experiences of other people, mostly of color, who aren't just experiencing violence "right now," but who have been suffering abuse and oppression from the police and other authority figures pretty much since forever. It's easy enough to call for non-violence when there seems to be rioting everywhere and people are having their property destroyed, but did you also call for non-violence when the police were beating up and killing people in their custody? Or when black people were singled out for disproportionate enforcement of minor offences? Or when you learned that black people are far more likely to be killed by police than white people are? It is understandable that you only took to social media to complain about violence when it affected you, but you seem to be discounting the far greater violence that black people in Baltimore, and elsewhere, have suffered at the hands of local authorities. farv posted this quote from MLK during the unrest in Ferguson, and it's still relevant now: "[I]t is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met." And what have random white people done to deserve violence? I'm pretty sure Travis hasn't killed any black people. I honestly have no clue what point you are trying to make. The point is, is that if police brutality is the problem, Travis wasn't the cause. If the riots really are about police being assholes, why are random white people being targeted? The business owners aren't going around shooting innocent people or letting people die in the back of their car. So why burn businesses? The answer is because the mob is just as racist as the cops they hate. "Those business owners are white, ergo they're the problem." That's how the rioters and looters see it. So?
I see. You're ok with racism when it's your favorite race doing. Only black people can be victims of racism right? Those business owners had it coming, they had some money and are white. They're the cause of all the problems in Baltimore.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
when your child is throwing a tantrum for some irrational reason, ordinary reaction with the interest of the child in mind is to address his or her actual needs in a productive and healthy manner.
this basic interpretive charity is lost for a riot with some legitimate grievances.
|
On April 29 2015 03:07 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 03:02 puerk wrote:
When there is such a huge disparity in outcomes, supporting the status quo is actually pretty close to suppression.
A civilised society must strive to be better than this, and the whole personal responsibility crowd, is missing the mark: you can not pull yourself up by the bootstraps from the quicksand. And who is supporting the status quo? Those that continually apologize for why certain minorities have it rough and always advocate they be given some special assistance as a band aid certainly are.
So because efforts to help the situation fail at their goals, we should stop trying altogether and just live with a permanent disenfrenchised minority that is treated like shit and second class citizens?
On April 29 2015 03:10 oneofthem wrote:
when your child is throwing a tantrum for some irrational reason, ordinary reaction with the interest of the child in mind is to address his or her actual needs in a productive and healthy manner.
this basic interpretive charity is lost for a riot with some legitimate grievances.
and what about the posters that would not do so, but instead slap the child until it stops and "respects the authority" of its parents?
|
On April 29 2015 03:12 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2015 03:07 xDaunt wrote:On April 29 2015 03:02 puerk wrote:
When there is such a huge disparity in outcomes, supporting the status quo is actually pretty close to suppression.
A civilised society must strive to be better than this, and the whole personal responsibility crowd, is missing the mark: you can not pull yourself up by the bootstraps from the quicksand. And who is supporting the status quo? Those that continually apologize for why certain minorities have it rough and always advocate they be given some special assistance as a band aid certainly are. So because efforts to help the situation fail at their goals, we should stop trying altogether and just live with a permanent disenfrenchised minority that is treated like shit and second class citizens?
I'm not saying that we should ignore them. I'm just saying that we need to stop institutionalizing victimhood, which is obscenely racist when you actually think about its implications and follow them to their logical conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
