Evidence of black oppression? Just read before you react please

YBG wrote:

None of your statistics prove anything about institutionalized or systematic racism. It is possible that blacks commit a disproportionate share of all crimes and are also systematically oppressed by the police. One does not preclude the other.

Ask yourself this: If George Floyd had been a middle-aged white guy in a suit, driving a lexus do think he would have been treated the same way? No one really thinks that.

If the police were called for a counterfeit bill then yes the white man in a suit driving a Lexus would have been handcuffed until they could do a proper investigation into the bill. In fact, Floyd was driving a Mercedes. Then he would be allowed to leave when it's found the bill is fine. Unfortunately, for Floyd he resisted when they put him into the SUV. There is video that clearly shows that.

Now, that does not mean the officer shouldn't be charged with murder. Putting your knee into someone's neck over 2 minutes after their body goes limp is clearly trying to kill them.

Amen, amen, amen!! It's laughable that OP thinks that just because his own small community has stood behind a social media hashtag, rural white America--nay, America in general--is no longer racist. Come on.

Jim Crow Laws: Ended in 1950/60s

Civil Rights Act and Voters Rights Act: 1965

Redlining of Black Communities: Ended in the 1970s

Still today: Trash schools in low income areas due to lack of public funding.

All of that adds up to an inability to obtain a proper education, gain wealth, and pass it along to the next generation. Generational wealth is every thing when trying to move up the social and economic ladder.

You expect low income families and people of color to rebound from 200 years of systematic oppression in 50 years (1970-2020) when many of those systems are still in place?

Good ‘effin joke.

conservative straw man tactic wrote:

not using my normal handle on this one wrote:

I imagine the poster would want the NY Times to include what percent of violent crimes are committed by blacks. If the percentage of times they are violently apprehended matches the percentage of times they are involved in violent crime, then the NY Times is creating fake news.

So when someone presents facts, but not in the context that you want, that is fake news?

Wow.

When presented with unarguable facts, it’s much easier to call something fake than it is to adjust your line of thinking. The President has been using this strategy with surprising success for years now and it seems to be catching on.

conservative straw man tactic wrote:

not using my normal handle on this one wrote:

I imagine the poster would want the NY Times to include what percent of violent crimes are committed by blacks. If the percentage of times they are violently apprehended matches the percentage of times they are involved in violent crime, then the NY Times is creating fake news.

So when someone presents facts, but not in the context that you want, that is fake news?

Wow.

It's not about "the context that you want." It's lacking basic context , which is specifically left out because it doesn't fit the liberal tilt of the paper and its readers

what if the NYT wrote an article stating that because I have more speeding tickets than the average person I am being discriminated against? anyone reading such an article would wonder, "well, does he speed more than the average person?"

Dr Yuengling wrote:

conservative straw man tactic wrote:

So when someone presents facts, but not in the context that you want, that is fake news?

Wow.

It's not about "the context that you want." It's lacking basic context , which is specifically left out because it doesn't fit the liberal tilt of the paper and its readers

what if the NYT wrote an article stating that because I have more speeding tickets than the average person I am being discriminated against? anyone reading such an article would wonder, "well, does he speed more than the average person?"

But stating that you had more speeding tickets than the average person would not be fake news in your scenario. It's a fact.

reer wrote:

This is incredibly disingenuous, but I suppose I'm not surprised given the source.

reer wrote:

First, somewhat purposely, I didn't read the article initially.

I can't stop laughing at the irony.

Let the rationalization begin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU_rSAYR7SE&has_verified=1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU_rSAYR7SE&has_verified=1

The vast majority of murderers have two legs. How many do legs do you have, Mr. Good intentions?

I didn't say that. I said they are "at the very least sympathetic to the cause". Please read AND understand what I wrote. Regardless, I do not see racist as a problem in America anymore, at least not one on a large enough scale to have mass protests and riots over.

Good intentions only :) wrote:

Don't waste it by getting over emotional.

This clearly went over some people's head...

2 legs. Can you please elaborate on this I'm not seeing where this is going?

I am interested in the facts of the case. I am a but skeptical of the second degree murder charge. This is so not because I have any sympathy for the defendant, but the prosecution has to prove intent to murder. One thing in the prosecution's favor is that Chauvin and the victim knew each other as they both worked security at a nightclub type place. It is going to be difficult to rebut the State's contention that Chauvin brought significant prejudices to the situation, including his likely being aware of the victim's armed robbery conviction (ten years past). On the other hand, the defendant will likely point to a toxicology test reflecting meth and fentanyl, not helpful for anyone's health. In sum though, I dont see how kneeing someone in the neck for 8 and a half minutes furthers in lawful enforcement objective, and with the sum of all facts, hope the jury is fair. One other thing, there is a time and place to discuss crime statistics and the like, but I dont think that time is right now.

Good intentions only :) wrote:

queen_bee wrote:

Amen, amen, amen!! It's laughable that OP thinks that just because his own small community has stood behind a social media hashtag, rural white America--nay, America in general--is no longer racist. Come on.

I didn't say that. I said they are "at the very least sympathetic to the cause". Please read AND understand what I wrote. Regardless, I do not see racist as a problem in America anymore, at least not one on a large enough scale to have mass protests and riots over.

Of course you don't. You would have to understand what black Americans feel - maybe even listen to what they are telling you. The reasons for the biggest racial protests in America in over half a century escape you.

I'm by no means qualified to answer all these questions but here goes my best shot. I hear the high crime rates being brought up time and time again but I think what you have to understand is that the endemic system African American systems have found themselves in has led to the oppression of through a host of socioeconomic factors. The high crime rates some of you find justifiable through the lack of economic opportunity go hand in hand with the single motherhood rates. I have a very dear friend who taught for over a decade in inner city Oakland and he explained to me that most of these kids don't graduate high school. They don't have the opportunity or intention of higher level education either due to access or cultural barriers, and they don't have those guiding figures in their life. All of this results in an extremely high teen pregnancy rate. Unfortunately most children anywhere from fifteen to twenty five aren't ready to parent which is why you see such high single motherhood rates. Most children in America are fully mature only by the time they're around thirty, which by then is too late to reverse poor decisions that were made far earlier in life. I think its a vicious cycle and it's up to us as a society - not just something we leave in the hands of others or in the hands of African Americans - but something we as a whole work to change.

tldr; high crime and single motherhood stems from numerous socioeconomic biases and factors implemented/ingrained in us by our ancestors and society at large. This explains the data and the the vicious cycle of poverty and crime African Americans find themselves in.

the oppression of African Americans*

macdaddy wrote:

Jim Crow Laws: Ended in 1950/60s

Civil Rights Act and Voters Rights Act: 1965

Redlining of Black Communities: Ended in the 1970s

Still today: Trash schools in low income areas due to lack of public funding.

All of that adds up to an inability to obtain a proper education, gain wealth, and pass it along to the next generation. Generational wealth is every thing when trying to move up the social and economic ladder.

You expect low income families and people of color to rebound from 200 years of systematic oppression in 50 years (1970-2020) when many of those systems are still in place?

Good ‘effin joke.

So what do you propose? A redistribution of wealth? Reparations? Perhaps we could start by withdrawing all the $$$ from your bank account and give it to the people who need it most?