What is "Black Lives Matter"?

[rob63]

If drug use is largely equal, wouldn't the logical conclusion you have to infer be that police are racist, if the former is true? (P.S. I'm not saying this and don't believe it, just pointing out what that reasoning leads to.)
There's far more poor white people in the country, as a number, than there are poor black people.

I think information deeply critical to this discussion is missing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crack_epidemic_in_the_United_States

I think that is an interesting article, thanks.

Regarding the discussion of race; and, just to be clear, I never got the impression that Alpo was attempting to make the case that the police are racist or anything. He was simply offering up an explanation for what happened to the black community. My take away from the article about crack is that the laws passed to combat the crack "epidemic" had a disproportionate impact on black people largely because they inhabited the poorer areas of large cities. Consequently, those areas became a large part of the distribution network for those cities and the police departments of those cites inevitably arrested the people involved in those narcotics distribution networks.

Poorer whites weren't impacted in the same way because they lived in rural areas that didn't develop the same dynamic between criminal narcotics distribution and large city police departments.

I don't think it is necessary to believe that there was an intentional racist policy to understand that the unintended consequences could have effected one race harder than the other. I think the crack laws were passed because of the media making a big deal out of it, the way they always do about anything that might sell papers. I do not think for one second that anyone had the foresight to actually figure out that it would impact black people way out of proportion to whites, nobody is that clever.

Unfortunately, the unintended consequences have made it easier for demagogues that want to make the racist claim by giving them something that seems plausible on the surface, which I think helps explain the mess we are in now.

 

[indyartisan]

Laws with unintended consequences are a common theme with lawmakers.

 

[Kutnupe14]

That’s it. The entire video is basically telling you why everything you do is racist even if it’s not. It even tells you that it’s perceived racism simply because the black guy may have felt you didn’t choose him for being black.

I'll be honest. I doubt you are characterizing the training video correctly. I absolutely refuse to believe that there's an HR video that exhibits how you explained it. You got a name for the company that produce the video?

 

[Kutnupe14]

The "study" doesn't seem to acknowledge the cause of family disruption.

I have my own conclusions on why that happened.

Or generational wealth.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Some people always assume there is a complex agenda underneath. Sometimes the chart should be allowed to speak for itself before the "Yah Butts" show up.

Incarcerations of over 2 million souls is an indictment of our drug policies and our "tough on crime" approach. Where it started is pretty obvious on the chart.

ps. I didn't bother to put incarceration by race graphs up. That would have made a YahButt head explode.

You're being short sighted Alpo. Incarceration is only part of it. A conviction, an sometimes even an arrest, can be just as harmful.

 

[KLB]

I'll be honest. I doubt you are characterizing the training video correctly. I absolutely refuse to believe that there's an HR video that exhibits how you explained it. You got a name for the company that produce the video?

What exactly is it you find hard to believe? I am guessing he was taking unconscious bias training. I've been through some at our company and it is every bit as ridiculous as he says his was.

Is it his description of the offended party being black that has you doubting. What if he had said it was a woman and it was sexism? Same reaction?

The only example I can still remember from my last training was the teacher telling us how she had offended her co-worker, who had a parent of Japanese heritage, by using the phrase "open your kimono" in a meeting. You really have to dig deep to get offended by that one.

 

[Kutnupe14]

What exactly is it you find hard to believe? I am guessing he was taking unconscious bias training. I've been through some at our company and it is every bit as ridiculous as he says his was.

Is it his description of the offended party being black that has you doubting. What if he had said it was a woman and it was sexism? Same reaction?

The only example I can still remember from my last training was the teacher telling us how she had offended her co-worker, who had a parent of Japanese heritage, by using the phrase "open your kimono" in a meeting. You really have to dig deep to get offended by that one.

2 guys are standing, assumedly (I guess the video explains) everybody is a stranger. A white guy walks up, and asks the the other white guy to help him with something; apparently the video uses this as an example of racism/bias because the other guy is black? Well, that has to be the worst diversity training vid of ALL-TIME. Ive never seen the like. I would imagine that there's a bit more to that video that what was stated.

As for "open your kimono," I can see how that ruffles feathers. I sure it is based on the perception, back in the day, that Japanese business practices were sneaky; and obviously that has roots in the perception of Japanese from the war.

 

[KLB]

2 guys are standing, assumedly (I guess the video explains) everybody is a stranger. A white guy walks up, and asks the the other white guy to help him with something; apparently the video uses this as an example of racism/bias because the other guy is black? Well, that has to be the worst diversity training vid of ALL-TIME. Ive never seen the like. I would imagine that there's a bit more to that video that what was stated.

As for "open your kimono," I can see how that ruffles feathers. I sure it is based on the perception, back in the day, that Japanese business practices were sneaky; and obviously that has roots in the perception of Japanese from the war.

You aren't in a recent big corporate environment. Our training started a few years ago, and each new class is more ridiculous than the last. I'm sure our HR brass went to a conference where they heard this was so necessary for today's workforce.

I'm sure there was a little more context given in the training. He didn't actually say whether they knew each other or not in that example. I would guess they were probably supposed to know each other. He also didn't say what the situation was. Was it at work? Home?

Actually that isn't it at all. The phrase means something along the lines of open the books. The issue was that the woman who said it was not of Japanese decent, while the offended lady was partially.

 

[BigRed]

Well, I see Indianapolis is joining the flocks of sheep painting "black lives matter" on their streets as tribute to the Marxists.

Meh.

I have to wonder....if it is defaced, will the perps be given the same kid glove treatment as those that broke windows, spray painted buildings, looted businesses, and destroyed property in Indianapolis? Will paint on the street be better defended than property was back at the end of May?

(PS: Note: I am not advocating for the tribute to Marxists be defaced. It has happened elsewhere. Simply making note to see how the perps are treated if they do.)

 

[Alpo]

You're being short sighted Alpo. Incarceration is only part of it. A conviction, an sometimes even an arrest, can be just as harmful.

It's only a partial answer, Kut, in response to the cited article. Of course there are many more factors in play.

 

[jamil]

If drug use is largely equal, wouldn't the logical conclusion you have to infer be that police are racist, if the former is true? (P.S. I'm not saying this and don't believe it, just pointing out what that reasoning leads to.)
There's far more poor white people in the country, as a number, than there are poor black people.

I think information deeply critical to this discussion is missing.

I guess you could say the logical conclusion would be that cops are racist. But that would be a facile rationale. First, remember what the definition of racism means. So you’d be saying that greater incarceration rates is because cops don’t like black people because of their race. There are a lot better logical conclusions to draw than that.

I don’t think it’s one reason. It’s multivariate. Maybe in the disproportionate representation of blacks in the criminal justice system relating to the war on drugs is due to racist cops. That’s probably a much smaller chunk of it than some other factors. One bit of deeply critical information that’s been touched on but not talked about deeply is poverty. Blacks have a much higher poverty rate, about 3x, than whites. And poverty in black communities is concentrated mostly in densely populated urban areas juxtaposed with more affluent areas. You can always tell which side of the railroad tracks is the “wrong” side. Drug crime is much worse in these areas. So all the factors I mentioned which contribute to fatherless homes is at work in these communities in ways that aren’t as prevalent in poor white communities. So it’s less of an issue in white communities for a lot of reasons, most of which isn’t directly related to skin color. So it’s not primarily racism that causes the disparity.

Unless you believe in institutional racism. The way you tell that institutional racism is afoot, of the outcome is disproportionate across the population, it’s said to be institutionally racist, regardless of the causes. That’s not real ass racism. That does not involve intent. But that’s the purpose for the term, to be able to label every unequal outcome as racist.

 

[jamil]

I think that is an interesting article, thanks.

Regarding the discussion of race; and, just to be clear, I never got the impression that Alpo was attempting to make the case that the police are racist or anything. He was simply offering up an explanation for what happened to the black community. My take away from the article about crack is that the laws passed to combat the crack "epidemic" had a disproportionate impact on black people largely because they inhabited the poorer areas of large cities. Consequently, those areas became a large part of the distribution network for those cities and the police departments of those cites inevitably arrested the people involved in those narcotics distribution networks.

Poorer whites weren't impacted in the same way because they lived in rural areas that didn't develop the same dynamic between criminal narcotics distribution and large city police departments.

I don't think it is necessary to believe that there was an intentional racist policy to understand that the unintended consequences could have effected one race harder than the other. I think the crack laws were passed because of the media making a big deal out of it, the way they always do about anything that might sell papers. I do not think for one second that anyone had the foresight to actually figure out that it would impact black people way out of proportion to whites, nobody is that clever.

Unfortunately, the unintended consequences have made it easier for demagogues that want to make the racist claim by giving them something that seems plausible on the surface, which I think helps explain the mess we are in now.

That’s a good way to put that. Unintended consequences.

 

[jamil]

I'll be honest. I doubt you are characterizing the training video correctly. I absolutely refuse to believe that there's an HR video that exhibits how you explained it. You got a name for the company that produce the video?

It’s unbelievable, but it is happening in a lot if HR departments. There is legitimate social justice, and then there’s the critical social justice. And it’s ****ing crazy. It’s not in most companies, but it’s starting to get into many companies. This is critical race theory making its way through society. Probably the worst case I heard involved a trans/gay person. I thin the person was trans male, so biologically female, identifying as a male, and being attracted to...idunno. It gets confusing. Anyway that’s how the person identifies. “He”, I’ll say, said he got along well with coworkers. None of them close or considered “buddies” but he had a cordial and friendly working relationship. Well then the diversity officer found out about it and decided that everyone needed specific diversity training around trans/gay people. So all everyone had to attend the diversity training session where the trans/gay person sat in a chair in front of everyone. The trans/gay person said that was horrible enough to have the exclusive focus on him. But then the diversity officer made all his coworkers relate how they were transphobic/homophobic. They had to admit to what they thought about the person. Some admitted they thought it was sinful, odd, hard to accept, etcetera. Eventually the trans/gay person got up and left the room. It was horribly embarrassing as you could imagine. After that work became too awkward and he finally just quit. That’s not social justice. It was social poison.

It’s not everywhere yet. But it’s no longer just in the grievance studies departments at far left universities. It’s getting out into society.

 

[jamil]

Or generational wealth.

How would generational wealth have a sudden impact on the nuclear family? Low generational wealth would have an impact on keeping poverty rates steadily high over time. I don’t see how after generations that one generation would signal a destructive trend on families. That’s what we’re talking about here.

I think we all agree that intact families where both parents are involved in their children’s rearing is a good predictor of their future success. Generational wealth isn’t as big of a predictor, and even then, not as long as there are opportunities.

 

[BugI02]

So, the consensus seems to narrowing to drug dealers of means get into diversion programs rather than prison, assumedly because those greater means allow them to hire better representation (because it has been stipulated that it isn't about race, the ethnicity of the perp has no bearing, only the socio-economic status)

So what is the suggested solution? Hire a better class of public defender, give government subsidies to poor defendants to use to hire pricier attorneys or something else - or was the problem brought up precisely because it has no easy solution beyond that of personal responsibility and making better life choices? Why is maybe don't sell drugs never on the table, in which case the outcome for poor and wealthy would be the same?

I am also aware of fathers who are not incarcerated and still uninvolved in their childrens lives. Do we have any idea what percentage of the incarcerated would be worthwhile dads if they had gotten into diversion?

 

[PaulF]

How would generational wealth have a sudden impact on the nuclear family? Low generational wealth would have an impact on keeping poverty rates steadily high over time. I don’t see how after generations that one generation would signal a destructive trend on families. That’s what we’re talking about here.

I think we all agree that intact families where both parents are involved in their children’s rearing is a good predictor of their future success. Generational wealth isn’t as big of a predictor, and even then, not as long as there are opportunities.

A functioning family is a prerequisite for the accrual of generational wealth and, I think, is exactly what does make the difference when encountered opportunity is supposedly equal.

Generational wealth provides the capital reserve necessary to take advantage of opportunity when it is presented. Those with greater access to generational wealth will be able to capitalize on more opportunities on whole, and will be able to do so from a much earlier age.

Realized opportunity has a cumulative effect, as each realized opportunity leads to additional prospective opportunities.

It's pretty easy to see how more realized opportunities, starting from an earlier age, can add up to an outsized advantage...when viewed by those without the benefit of generational wealth.

 

[CBR1000rr]

I'm a bit late to the party & I'm sure it has already been said, however, it is worth repeating for those whom arent aware.

Black people matter.

BLM is a marxist organization fundraising for the democratic party off the graves of dead minorities.

They haven't donated a single dollar of their billion dollars they have raised to help improve the minority community.

The onky lives they care about are those who can advance their agenda and, unfortunately, only dead minorities fit that bill.

 

[Tombs]

I guess you could say the logical conclusion would be that cops are racist. But that would be a facile rationale. First, remember what the definition of racism means. So you’d be saying that greater incarceration rates is because cops don’t like black people because of their race. There are a lot better logical conclusions to draw than that.

I don’t think it’s one reason. It’s multivariate. Maybe in the disproportionate representation of blacks in the criminal justice system relating to the war on drugs is due to racist cops. That’s probably a much smaller chunk of it than some other factors. One bit of deeply critical information that’s been touched on but not talked about deeply is poverty. Blacks have a much higher poverty rate, about 3x, than whites. And poverty in black communities is concentrated mostly in densely populated urban areas juxtaposed with more affluent areas. You can always tell which side of the railroad tracks is the “wrong” side. Drug crime is much worse in these areas. So all the factors I mentioned which contribute to fatherless homes is at work in these communities in ways that aren’t as prevalent in poor white communities. So it’s less of an issue in white communities for a lot of reasons, most of which isn’t directly related to skin color. So it’s not primarily racism that causes the disparity.

Unless you believe in institutional racism. The way you tell that institutional racism is afoot, of the outcome is disproportionate across the population, it’s said to be institutionally racist, regardless of the causes. That’s not real ass racism. That does not involve intent. But that’s the purpose for the term, to be able to label every unequal outcome as racist.

I actually do think institutional racism exists to an extent, mostly in various unintentional ways. A comedy of errors seeking to solve racism, creating problems that didn't previously exist.

One thing I think is absolutely undebatable is that minority groups are robbed of their agency, in the pursuit of various SJW politicians attempting to use them for their platforms.

Either way I don't think it's a solvable problem until the current day SJW belief system is done away with entirely and we can approach race without walking on egg shells, or trying to make up for things that happened 300 years ago. You know, actually work towards a resolution of current day problems rather than drowning in various social belief systems.

Families being broken up due to poverty is a relatively recent thing. Just one of countless other examples of the comedy of errors.

 

[migunner]

A group that does NOT care about Black Lives lost by Blacks in Chicago!!

 

[jamil]

I actually do think institutional racism exists to an extent, mostly in various unintentional ways. A comedy of errors seeking to solve racism, creating problems that didn't previously exist.

One thing I think is absolutely undebatable is that minority groups are robbed of their agency, in the pursuit of various SJW politicians attempting to use them for their platforms.

Either way I don't think it's a solvable problem until the current day SJW belief system is done away with entirely and we can approach race without walking on egg shells, or trying to make up for things that happened 300 years ago. You know, actually work towards a resolution of current day problems rather than drowning in various social belief systems.

Families being broken up due to poverty is a relatively recent thing. Just one of countless other examples of the comedy of errors.

I agree with all that except with the use of the term "institutional racism" to refer to something that is unintentional. "Unintentional institutional racism" is an oxymoron. If it's unintentional it cannot be racism. Real institutional racism was made illegal by the civil rights act.

Now, I could agree with you that there is unfairness, disadvantaging, stereotyping built into many institutions. That doesn't make it racist. But it's not benign either, and those are things that need to change. And I agree with you that critical social justice is making things worse. We had come along way in race relations and desegregating society in a way that people agree with. But SJWs want to regress back to an era of racial superiority and segregation, except with the hierarchy flipped. We were at a time when race mattered less than any other time in our history, to progress socially to a state where the race of a person doesn't predict anything about their future. That's a WAY better world than the SJWs propose.