or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

#BLM - Page 2

post #16 of 79
post #17 of 79
As a confrontational organization, BLM has done exactly what it should have. BLM has forced the nation to talk about police brutality against POC, which I think if not present everywhere, is undoubtedly present in many different places, if not most. The problem with groups such as BLM, is that although the militancy can raise awareness, it isn't great at finding solutions. Change by force usually comes with staunch resistance, which we can already see with the reaction of #alllivesmatter as well as the resistance of police officers to call bad cops bad cops. It goes both ways though. When BLM activists are confront with a "there's a problem in the community" argument, they shout it down as racism, which although those making the accusation may be racist, it would be beneficial at this point in time for BLM to improve not only the problem of police brutality but also intraracial violence.

tl;dr BLM has been good at raising awareness but may not be the organization or movement that will actually bring about real change.
post #18 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groovingrover View Post

As a confrontational organization, BLM has done exactly what it should have. BLM has forced the nation to talk about police brutality against POC, which I think if not present everywhere, is undoubtedly present in many different places, if not most. The problem with groups such as BLM, is that although the militancy can raise awareness, it isn't great at finding solutions. Change by force usually comes with staunch resistance, which we can already see with the reaction of #alllivesmatter as well as the resistance of police officers to call bad cops bad cops. It goes both ways though. When BLM activists are confront with a "there's a problem in the community" argument, they shout it down as racism, which although those making the accusation may be racist, it would be beneficial at this point in time for BLM to improve not only the problem of police brutality but also intraracial violence.

tl;dr BLM has been good at raising awareness but may not be the organization or movement that will actually bring about real change.

That is a quality post. Welcome aboard.
post #19 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post


That is a quality post. Welcome aboard.


Thanks, I'm always down for a good discussion, I'm hoping to step out of this one with a different/better perspective!

 

EDIT: I hope your response wasn't sarcasm! :lookaround:

post #20 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groovingrover View Post


Thanks, I'm always down for a good discussion, I'm hoping to step out of this one with a different/better perspective!

EDIT: I hope your response wasn't sarcasm! lookaround.gif

No sarcasm...not nearly biting enough. wink.gif
post #21 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by groovingrover View Post


Thanks, I'm always down for a good discussion, I'm hoping to step out of this one with a different/better perspective!


groovingrover, your post was excellent. If you have the time watch this Heather MacDonald video, and comment with your thoughts

post #22 of 79
A much shorter vid of Heather MacDonald's views,

post #23 of 79
I think there is a lot to unpack (I watched the second video, not the first). I'm not certain, but I would guess she has some motivation for defending the practice of incarceration. Although nothing she says is factually incorrect, it seems to me to ignore a lot of what the true SOURCES of the problems are. For instance, she claims that there is a disproportionate level of blacks committing crimes which is why their incarceration levels are higher, but I know I've read from multiple sources that the sentencing for the same or similar crimes tends to be harsher for blacks than whites (I don't have a particular citation here, seeing as how I'm at work, but I know that if I were testifying for a Congressional hearing I sure as hell would--something she does not).

But, let's take her claim at face value, and say that indeed blacks tend to commit crime at higher levels (proportionally) than whites. We've been waging a war on drugs now for 30+ years, and yet high levels of incarceration haven't lowered the number of blacks committing these crimes, if we are to accept that blacks are being put away justly because of their illegal actions and intentions. So perhaps the current prison system IS doing it's job...but the job it's performing isn't helping. We're incarcerating people who either return to the streets and continue their previous track record of crime, or if they do have a change of heart someone else simply steps into their place.

The racism of the prison system and "mass incarceration" may not be intentional, but if you create a policy towards something that disproportionately affects one certain community more than the others it is de facto racist, regardless of the de jure intent and language. An appropriate response to the drug epidemic that is incarcerating so many blacks is, in my opinion, instead a street-level hands on approach to treating substance abuses that feed the crimes of drug dealing and drug-related gang violence that plague overwhelmingly the black and other minority populations. Disillusion is a powerful entity, and I think it's safe to say that regardless of whether or not they're committing the crimes, blacks are disillusioned with the system and feel that no matter how hard they try they may never get out of the poverty trap, so drugs and violence are an accepted reality although they may realize that it's not the best reality.

It would take a collective effort of both government and black community to create an atmosphere like this, but until we stop mass incarceration of blacks - regardless of whether they're committing the crimes or not - we won't be able to round that turn and take steps towards helping the black community help themselves out of the trap they're currently in.

Surely there are some logical flaws somewhere in these couple of paragraphs and please point them out to continue the dialogue but I'm a bit scatter brained and threw these together between work projects. Cheers
post #24 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by groovingrover View Post

"The racism of the prison system and "mass incarceration" may not be intentional, but if you create a policy towards something that disproportionately affects one certain community more than the others it is de facto racist, regardless of the de jure intent and language

Disagree with this statement, strongly.

What you are describing is a disparate impact. Disparate impact of a policy on blacks could be the result of racism, but that conclusion doesn't necessarily follow.

There has been a tendency in recent decadesto conflate that concept with racism, and it heLPS no one.

For one thing, it's a dirty rhetorical trick by the people using it. The racist label, basically the worst thing you can call someone in 21st century America, gets its power from the straight-up evil treatment of blacks in the past, which was rationalized with bigotry. It's cheap to smear people with a label of bigotry, but not have to define their offense that way.

But it's also an impediment to real solutions for the people being white-knighted. Very, very little of the difference in outcomes between blacks/whites/asians/etc is explained by any kind of racial malace. There is little empirical support that happens, and really, the theories and causal mechanisms of 'institutional racism' are implausible. But people will latch on to the racism explanation, because it's the easy thing to do. No one has to accept accountability and no one has to face uncomfortable truths.

In a sense, a large part of the USG's social project in the second half of the 20th century could be said to be attempting to correct for disparate impact. Is the black community better off for it? I don't really think so, and would prefer we try a different path that didn't involved acceptence of a quasi-religious delusion.
post #25 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pennglock View Post


Disagree with this statement, strongly.

What you are describing is a disparate impact. Disparate impact of a policy on blacks could be the result of racism, but that conclusion doesn't necessarily follow.

There has been a tendency in recent decadesto conflate that concept with racism, and it heLPS no one.

For one thing, it's a dirty rhetorical trick by the people using it. The racist label, basically the worst thing you can call someone in 21st century America, gets its power from the straight-up evil treatment of blacks in the past, which was rationalized with bigotry. It's cheap to smear people with a label of bigotry, but not have to define their offense that way.

But it's also an impediment to real solutions for the people being white-knighted. Very, very little of the difference in outcomes between blacks/whites/asians/etc is explained by any kind of racial malace. There is little empirical support that happens, and really, the theories and causal mechanisms of 'institutional racism' are implausible. But people will latch on to the racism explanation, because it's the easy thing to do. No one has to accept accountability and no one has to face uncomfortable truths.

In a sense, a large part of the USG's social project in the second half of the 20th century could be said to be attempting to correct for disparate impact. Is the black community better off for it? I don't really think so, and would prefer we try a different path that didn't involved acceptence of a quasi-religious delusion.


Good point. I suppose at this part in my argument I was incorrectly conflating the idea of mass incarceration with other policy aims (mostly taken by states), of which I believe the motive behind to be not singularly racist, but race being a part of it (such as the immediacy of voter ID laws in Texas among other states after the Shelby County ruling). It would stemlike you have more experience on the issue, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on BLM and "mass incarceration," as opposed to poking holes in my argument (if that statement seems a bit d***ish, it's not intended to be). Like I said, I'm here to engage but I'm also willing to allow solid argument and critical thinking to sway my opinion. 

post #26 of 79
While this isn't restricted to shootings, I think it gets to the point of why so many blacks are willing to immediately believe that the shootings are motivated by race. Racially slanted policing is just expected in the black community.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/the-senates-only-black-republican-opens-up-about-being-mistreated-by-police/491435/

This is from the only black Republican Senator.
post #27 of 79
In other words, he's been pulled over a lot and he suspects it was because he's black. Does he actually know why he was pulled over in most of those cases? Probably not. He just thinks it was racially motivated because "everyone knows" the cops pull people over for being black.

Perhaps if he hadn't been told all his life that everyone secretly hates him for the color of his skin, he'd have a different perception of those encounters.
post #28 of 79
Yeah, that article was not very convincing. He DID have a broken taillight! He WAS speeding!
Being called "boy" was quite the micro aggression.

Edit: the linked article within that article about reducing police encounters for broken tail lights was more interesting.
post #29 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by origenesprit View Post

Yeah, that article was not very convincing. He DID have a broken taillight! He WAS speeding!
Being called "boy" was quite the micro aggression.

He was not, however, driving a stolen car. How many white Senators do you think have ever been pulled over on vague suspicion of driving a stolen car?



Anecdotal stories are always limited in scope. But the perception, and the narrative, are important things to understand if we're going to try to address the issue in the black community. Is it a group delusion like Ataturk seems to think? Or is there really something going on?

There's a near-universal perception that cops are biased against blacks. The evidence is hard to tease out, but there does appear to be decent evidence that blacks are targeted more often in "investigatory stops," especially for those kind of minor traffic violations. Even if this stuff stems from a legitimate (and valid) attempt by the police to do their jobs more effectively, it can easily be understood how it would have a corrosive effect on the relationship between the community and the police.
post #30 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

There's a near-universal perception that cops are biased against blacks. The evidence is hard to tease out, but there does appear to be decent evidence that blacks are targeted more often in "investigatory stops," especially for those kind of minor traffic violations. Even if this stuff stems from a legitimate (and valid) attempt by the police to do their jobs more effectively, it can easily be understood how it would have a corrosive effect on the relationship between the community and the police.

If we can agree that perception is important, perhaps we can also agree that those in positions of power or influence ought to do what they can to reinforce, rather than undermine, the black community's confidence in the police?

Or do you think all this unfounded, hysterical agitation is actually good for anyone?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money