Two White Teens Burn Mentally Ill Black Man Alive...

[CivilDiscourse]

They're all the same thing though. One group is the oppressor and one group is the oppressed. One group has real power and one group doesn't.No different than comparing multimillionaires and the impoverished. So, not a strawman.

Yes. You have a double standard, one for "the oppressed" one for the "oppressor"

All you've done is justifying the two standards.

[Psychic Missile]

Yes. You have a double standard, one for "the oppressed" one for the "oppressor"

All you've done is justifying the two standards.

Whether the standards are justified is what determines whether it's a double standard, otherwise any two things being treated differently is a double standard and the term has no meaning.

[CivilDiscourse]

Whether the standards are justified is what determines whether it's a double standard, otherwise any two things being treated differently is a double standard and the term has no meaning.

Everyone feels their standards are justified.

[myth]

Interesting that you should mention on descriptions of people for police incidents - because as far back as the early 80's, we were being profoundly criticized for mention race or any other related attributes of a suspect because it was "racial profiling".

Sure. I've literally had situations where there are two people with the same first and last name as the suspect....living in the same county.....but of different race/ethnicity. In the interest of making sure you're accusing the correct person, it's sort of helpful. Same reason I ask about approximate age, height, hair, facial hair, and tattoos.

[myth]

Society lumps people together because of their skin color and treats them differently on that basis alone. There's a huge difference between creating division and observing/commenting on it. If bias and systemic oppression are ignored for the sake of colorblindness, they can't be fought against.

Of course. But it's also true that as long as we continue to focus on race as an issue, people who have an implicit bias in favor of the existence of systemic racism (or a systemically racist criminal justice system, or widespread police bias against people of color, or whatever) will continue to perceive racist motivations behind other people's and/or institutions actions, whether or not such a motivation actually exists.

As a recent example, look at the shooting of the women in the massage parlors in Atlanta. The shooter described his motive for killing them, which was out of disgust at himself for his own sexual urges towards those women. No mention of racism, apparently. But many seem to be wondering why he's not being charged with a hate crime. I'd hazard a guess that if he likes having sex with Asian women, that's actually a possible counterargument to his being biased AGAINST that group. But I digress.

I recently listened to the NYT's The Daily podcast where they were talking about anti-Asian sentiment in the US, this case, and the very low prosecution/charge rates of hate crime cases generally. And what sincerely AMAZED me, is that there was no mention that if you're not able to bring charges because you don't have any evidence that it WAS a hate crime...then maybe it wasn't even a hate crime (or at the very least, no logical reason for making that assumption exists). The entire discussion was predicated on the assumption that the crimes they spoke of WERE hate crimes and geared towards why the CJ was so bad a prosecuting them. People who disagree on these issues both have their own implicit biases, social justice types included.

As a side note, I tend to think using the term "racism" to describe actions which unintentionally impact persons of color is both misleading and counterproductive. I think it tends to shift the focus towards thinking the plight of persons of color is the result of widespread animus against them in the present day -- which it is not. If we want to improve the lot of minorities, we have to first acknowledge their lived experience as a group in recent history. And then we have to tackle the issues directly contributing to those circumstances today. We should try to look at data from a realistic perspective without seeing closet KKK members behind every action.

As one Stanford economist and social theorist I've read noted:

"In some countries today, any claim that intergroup differences in outcomes are results of intergroup differences in skills, behavior or performance are dismissed by the intelligentsia as false 'perceptions,' 'prejustices,' or 'stereotypes' or else are condemned as 'blaming the victim'. Seldom are any of these assertions backed up by empirical evidence or logical analysis that would make them anything more than arbitrary assertions that happen to be in vogue among contemporary intellectual elites."

I agree with the above author that if we want to strive for a more equal society, we have to first view the situation clearly. The above quote was written in the context of a vigorous argument against the idea that the aforementioned intergroup differences having anything to do with genetics. The main thrust of his argument is that such differences are the result of the lived experiences of the groups through successive generations, which, regarding minority communities involved systematic oppression and sometimes enslavement.

[Cow Poke]

Sure. I've literally had situations where there are two people with the same first and last name as the suspect....living in the same county.....but of different race/ethnicity. In the interest of making sure you're accusing the correct person, it's sort of helpful. Same reason I ask about approximate age, height, hair, facial hair, and tattoos.

The tattoos thing gets me - it's almost like God gives criminals and gang members the gift of stupid, because tattoos are some of the most useful characteristics in narrowing down a suspect list, or building one up.

[Psychic Missile]

Of course. But it's also true that as long as we continue to focus on race as an issue, people who have an implicit bias in favor of the existence of systemic racism (or a systemically racist criminal justice system, or widespread police bias against people of color, or whatever) will continue to perceive racist motivations behind other people's and/or institutions actions, whether or not such a motivation actually exists.

As a recent example, look at the shooting of the women in the massage parlors in Atlanta. The shooter described his motive for killing them, which was out of disgust at himself for his own sexual urges towards those women. No mention of racism, apparently. But many seem to be wondering why he's not being charged with a hate crime. I'd hazard a guess that if he likes having sex with Asian women, that's actually a possible counterargument to his being biased AGAINST that group. But I digress.

I recently listened to the NYT's The Daily podcast where they were talking about anti-Asian sentiment in the US, this case, and the very low prosecution/charge rates of hate crime cases generally. And what sincerely AMAZED me, is that there was no mention that if you're not able to bring charges because you don't have any evidence that it WAS a hate crime...then maybe it wasn't even a hate crime (or at the very least, no logical reason for making that assumption exists). The entire discussion was predicated on the assumption that the crimes they spoke of WERE hate crimes and geared towards why the CJ was so bad a prosecuting them. People who disagree on these issues both have their own implicit biases, social justice types included.

As a side note, I tend to think using the term "racism" to describe actions which unintentionally impact persons of color is both misleading and counterproductive. I think it tends to shift the focus towards thinking the plight of persons of color is the result of widespread animus against them in the present day -- which it is not. If we want to improve the lot of minorities, we have to first acknowledge their lived experience as a group in recent history. And then we have to tackle the issues directly contributing to those circumstances today. We should try to look at data from a realistic perspective without seeing closet KKK members behind every action.

As one Stanford economist and social theorist I've read noted:

"In some countries today, any claim that intergroup differences in outcomes are results of intergroup differences in skills, behavior or performance are dismissed by the intelligentsia as false 'perceptions,' 'prejustices,' or 'stereotypes' or else are condemned as 'blaming the victim'. Seldom are any of these assertions backed up by empirical evidence or logical analysis that would make them anything more than arbitrary assertions that happen to be in vogue among contemporary intellectual elites."

I agree with the above author that if we want to strive for a more equal society, we have to first view the situation clearly. The above quote was written in the context of a vigorous argument against the idea that the aforementioned intergroup differences having anything to do with genetics. The main thrust of his argument is that such differences are the result of the lived experiences of the groups through successive generations, which, regarding minority communities involved systematic oppression and sometimes enslavement.

People who perpetuate and / or gain from systemic racism want the labeling of racist acts and systems ignored. They want people to think that the word "racist" is thrown around so often that we should ignore the accusation. They want us see racial injustice as bad luck or the consequences of a victim's individual actions, that is, to be colorblind.

People think that specific recent shooter (there have been so many lately) committed a hate crime because he went out of his way to kill Asian people. Actions speak louder than words.

A criminal charge being difficult to prove in court in no way means that it seldom happens.

Most systemic racism is unintentional / without intention. That's why people point it out as racist.

What do you think, if anything, can be done to correct for successive generations of systematic oppression and sometimes enslavement? Dos it need correcting?

[NorrinRadd]

People who perpetuate and / or gain from systemic racism want the labeling of racist acts and systems ignored. They want people to think that the word "racist" is thrown around so often that we should ignore the accusation. They want us see racial injustice as bad luck or the consequences of a victim's individual actions, that is, to be colorblind.

People think that specific recent shooter (there have been so many lately) committed a hate crime because he went out of his way to kill Asian people. Actions speak louder than words.

A criminal charge being difficult to prove in court in no way means that it seldom happens.

Most systemic racism is unintentional / without intention. That's why people point it out as racist.

What do you think, if anything, can be done to correct for successive generations of systematic oppression and sometimes enslavement? Dos it need correcting?

Nothing positive can be done as long as each side only listens to "approved" voices. As long as what appears to be "your" side continues harping on "systemic racism," I am going to continue, and in fact increase, my practices of pointing out the facts that most anti-Asian violence is perpetrated by blacks; that in cases of interracial violence, whites are *much* more likely to be the victims than the perpetrators; that blacks ranging from old-timers like Rob Woodson to relative youngsters like Candace Owens deny either the reality or the importance of "systemic" racism.

[oxmixmudd]

Nothing positive can be done as long as each side only listens to "approved" voices. As long as what appears to be "your" side continues harping on "systemic racism," I am going to continue, and in fact increase, my practices of pointing out the facts that most anti-Asian violence is perpetrated by blacks; that in cases of interracial violence, whites are *much* more likely to be the victims than the perpetrators; that blacks ranging from old-timers like Rob Woodson to relative youngsters like Candace Owens deny either the reality or the importance of "systemic" racism.

Its not either or. There is systemic racism. There are events that only appear superficially to be of a racist nature. The problem is that by denying systemic racism those that do so deny the only real solution to both problems. As long as systemic racism exists, their will be heightened sensitivity to the potential an act is itself racist. And until there is no tangible, objective difference between being black in America and being white in America will it become absurd to first look at an action against a black person as having a reasonable chance of being racially motivated.

As for black/Asian racism, that's a bit different in that although it is racially motivated hatred, it is not built into our culture and social structure, at least not yet. White/Asian racism in our country does have a history and is partially infused into the culture, though it is not as extensive or as deeply rooted over time as white/black racism.

[Sparko]

The tattoos thing gets me - it's almost like God gives criminals and gang members the gift of stupid, because tattoos are some of the most useful characteristics in narrowing down a suspect list, or building one up.

My brother (the cop) used to say the same thing about punks wearing their pants loose and below their butts. He said it made them a lot easier to chase down when their pant fell down and tripped them.

[Psychic Missile]

Nothing positive can be done as long as each side only listens to "approved" voices. As long as what appears to be "your" side continues harping on "systemic racism," I am going to continue, and in fact increase, my practices of pointing out the facts that most anti-Asian violence is perpetrated by blacks; that in cases of interracial violence, whites are *much* more likely to be the victims than the perpetrators; that blacks ranging from old-timers like Rob Woodson to relative youngsters like Candace Owens deny either the reality or the importance of "systemic" racism.

Going out of your way to find fringe opinions that reinforce your world view means you're doing nothing but listening to approved voices. Why are you bringing up black-perpetuated anti-Asian / interracial violence when they're unrelated to larger systemic racism concerns? Does it make you more comfortable to not take racism seriously?

[NorrinRadd]

Going out of your way to find fringe opinions that reinforce your world view means you're doing nothing but listening to approved voices. Why are you bringing up black-perpetuated anti-Asian / interracial violence when they're unrelated to larger systemic racism concerns? Does it make you more comfortable to not take racism seriously?

Which "fringe" opinions?

[Psychic Missile]

Which "fringe" opinions?

"deny either the reality or the importance of "systemic" racism"

[NorrinRadd]

"deny either the reality or the importance of "systemic" racism"

If you're going to argue that voices like those of Shelby Steele, Rob Woodson, Larry Elder, Leo Terrell, Walter E. Williams, Thomas Sowell, David Webb, and Carol Swain should be dismissed, then you are unworthy of being part of any discussion. All of them were alive to experience the days when systemic racism against blacks was real and impactful. If their views are to be "cancelled," then there is no hope of dialogue, nor of anything resembling a peaceful resolution.

[Psychic Missile]

If you're going to argue that voices like those of Shelby Steele, Rob Woodson, Larry Elder, Leo Terrell, Walter E. Williams, Thomas Sowell, David Webb, and Carol Swain should be dismissed, then you are unworthy of being part of any discussion. All of them were alive to experience the days when systemic racism against blacks was real and impactful. If their views are to be "cancelled," then there is no hope of dialogue, nor of anything resembling a peaceful resolution.

Not dismissed. If someone is denying either the reality or the importance of systemic racism, they have a minority opinion (among experts/academics). If you are specifically seeking those people out, you are only listening to voices you (and those who downplay racism) approve of. Have you ever sincerely tried to learn about systemic racism from people who think it's real and important?