White House WHITE interns

[Mountain Man]

You're white so you're a racist" is itself a racist claim, so anyone making it is showing that (i) they are themselves racist, (ii) they haven't put much thought into it.

You just described critical race theory in a nutshell.

[Roy]

You just described critical race theory in a nutshell.

Check again.

[Mountain Man]

Check again.

Check what again? Critical race theory is based on the notion that all whites are inherently racist simply because they're white, and as you correctly said, this "is itself a racist claim, so anyone making it is showing that (i) they are themselves racist, (ii) they haven't put much thought into it."

[Roy]

Check what again?

Don't then. Remain ignorant.

[Mountain Man]

I'm not sure why you're pushing back so hard when I'm actually agreeing with you for once. Are you so desperate to show me up that you're willing to throw yourself under the bus in the process?

[Teallaura]

Don't then. Remain ignorant.

Um, what?

According to the UCLA School of Public Affairs:

CRT recognizes that racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society. The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures. CRT identifies that these power structures are based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of people of color.<sup>[9]

source</sup>

Using UCLA's definition, how is it possible to be white and not be a racist? Institutions don't have a racial trait - people do (presuming it exists - Hi, Leo!). Institutions can't be 'racists' - only humans can do that. If no individuals are racists how the heck can institutions be? A society that has a trait that none of its members have? Huh?

The definition is rather self serving - it's already decided that power structures must be based on privilege and supremacy - looks more like a conviction in search of a proof than a theory of how society might function.

[Teallaura]

You're white so you're a racist" is itself a racist claim, so anyone making it is showing that (i) they are themselves racist, (ii) they haven't put much thought into it.

Thanks!

[carpedm9587]

Actually I think I am on the Mormon's "no fly list" - I had two come by my house years ago and invited them in and started sharing the real gospel with them and showing them how the BoM was wrong and Joseph Smith was a fraud. One of them called me a week later and said they were not allowed to visit me again :-(

I have a Jehovah's witness who visits me every Friday. I often have him in and we have coffee and discuss/debate religious ideas. He's a nice guy. Definitely has his opinions about religion.

[lilpixieofterror]

I don't recall suggesting anyone was borg...?

[carpedm9587]

Check what again? Critical race theory is based on the notion that all whites are inherently racist simply because they're white, and as you correctly said, this "is itself a racist claim, so anyone making it is showing that (i) they are themselves racist, (ii) they haven't put much thought into it."

First, I had never heard the expression "critical race theory" until this exchange. Second, when I look it up, that's not the definition I find. Critical race theory appears to be a legal concept that suggests that "white supremacy" and racial power are themes that tend to maintain themselves, even in the legal system, and looks for ways to transform that. I do not see any reference to "if you are white you are racist." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory

However, it appears to be a class of belief that calls for rectifying racial injustices by, in effect, aggressively reversing the injustice on the basis of race (http://hlrecord.org/2016/02/racism-j...l-race-theory/). That would make it a kind of "affirmative action" on steroids. As a consequence, it's on my list of "racist approaches to the racism problem." Not a fan.

[carpedm9587]

You asked me if it was hard always wondering if I am racist. I answered your question. I have no idea what the "borg" have to do with anything, hence my confusion.

[carpedm9587]

I have been reading through this thread, and I have to admit I find myself somewhat dismayed. First, it is true that racism is a "people problem." People are racist - not buildings or any other "thing." So I agree with those statements. But that does not make "institutional racism" non-existent. Institutional (or systemic) racism is when a pattern of racism is "baked into" a culture in such a way as to be likely to be highly distributed and more common than it ever should be.

A simple example drawn from the legal system. Several studies have shown that a black person is 8-12 times as likely to be wrongly convicted of a crime than a white person. For sexual assault crimes, they are 3.5 times as likely to wrongly convicted as a white person. When sentences are handed down for crimes, a black person is statistically likely to get a harsher sentence than a white person for the same crime. These are national trends that show variation from region to region, but almost across the country there is a disparity of greater or lesser proportions. When such a disparity manifests, it behooves us to ask, "why is this happening?" Is there something about how the legal system functions that makes this likely? Does the legal system attract a disproportionate number of racist people? Does working in law enforcement somehow develop racist attitudes in people? What exactly is the cause of this difference?

This is one of many examples of what is termed "institutional racism." That is nothing more than a term that says, "this institution (whatever it is) shows a propensity for racially biased outcomes. It suggests we should look at how the institution functions, and what factors are leading to the outcome. It does NOT suggest, "everyone who works for or within this institution is racist."

The tendency of the right to dismiss racism is as bad as the tendency of the left to call everything that impacts races differently, "racism." If we are ever to right the iniquities in our society, by definition, some things will impact races differently. It is a fact that the black community, on average, goes to less-well-funded schools, and has a significantly lower incidence of college admissions (by percentage). To put in "black education programs" is, to me, a racist solution to a racial problem. When you target the problem by skin color, you are doing the same thing that was done before: making race the focus. In the process, you not only perpetuate the problem, you leave a wide open door for white supremacists to leavy the (justified) claim that they are now the victims of racism. Instead, you solve that problem by creating programs that target "anyone suffering from a poor education infrastructure." That will target EVERYONE so impacted, regardless of race. Because the black community, in general, is more affected, they will tend to benefit more from such programs. That does not make the approach racist. That is an inevitable by product of past racism. But by targeting the problem, rather than the color, you avoid letting people of other races that ALSO need the help (white or otherwise) slip through the cracks, and you also avoid giving black people who do not NEED the help aid they do not need.

[demi-conservative]

A simple example drawn from the legal system. Several studies have shown that a black person is 8-12 times as likely to be wrongly convicted of a crime than a white person. For sexual assault crimes, they are 3.5 times as likely to wrongly convicted as a white person. When sentences are handed down for crimes, a black person is statistically likely to get a harsher sentence than a white person for the same crime. These are national trends that show variation from region to region, but almost across the country there is a disparity of greater or lesser proportions. When such a disparity manifests, it behooves us to ask, "why is this happening?" Is there something about how the legal system functions that makes this likely? Does the legal system attract a disproportionate number of racist people? Does working in law enforcement somehow develop racist attitudes in people? What exactly is the cause of this difference?

Simple, higher crime rates among black people.

These are national trends that show variation from region to region, but almost across the country there is a disparity of greater or lesser proportions. When such a disparity manifests, it behooves us to ask, "why is this happening?"

The tendency of the right to dismiss racism is as bad as the tendency of the left to call everything that impacts races differently, "racism."

When left always crying wolf, people will ignore after some time. It is natural! Go fix fellow libs first!!!

[carpedm9587]

Simple, higher crime rates among black people.

Read it carefully, Demi. The statistic wasn't about conviction rate in general - it was about "wrongful conviction." The conviction rate will be higher is there is a higher crime rate, as you note. But the wrongful conviction rate SHOULD be the same, unless there is systemic/institutional racism involved.

When left always crying wolf, people will ignore after some time. It is natural! Go fix fellow libs first!!!

I don't think the right can get off so easily. This is a chicken/egg problem.

[demi-conservative]

Read it carefully, Demi. The statistic wasn't about conviction rate in general - it was about "wrongful conviction." The conviction rate will be higher is there is a higher crime rate, as you note. But the wrongful conviction rate SHOULD be the same, unless there is systemic/institutional racism involved.

You asked question, demi gave answer: What exactly is the cause of this difference? higher crime rates among black people.

I don't think the right can get off so easily. This is a chicken/egg problem.

Get libs to stop screaming 'racist!!!!!!' all the time, like shuny. Then maybe we can have progress.