USA Politics (redux)

[BasilValentine]

Not to belabor the point, but are you suggesting that association with BLM is defamation?

No, you are.

[DizzyD]

No, you are.

Well one more thing: no, you're the one that used the word "defame". I didn't say anything at all about protestors.

[DavidW]

I'm sure there are some very well-meaning and good-hearted people involved in BLM, but unfortunately that is starting to smell like a massive grift.

Alright explain the "grift".  I put it in quotations because I have no idea how protests is associated with grifting!  Who profits?  I assumed that it was a poor choice of words, or you were unfamiliar with the word.  But you've proven this afternoon to delight in word games.  So get on with it.  What are you thinking?

[DizzyD]

Alright explain the "grift".  I put it in quotations because I have no idea how protests is associated with grifting!  Who profits?

Well specifically the BLM Global Network Fund and PAC. That money came from somewhere.

I assumed that it was a poor choice of words, or you were unfamiliar with the word.  But you've proven this afternoon to delight in word games.  So get on with it.  What are you thinking?

No, it's grifting, every bit as much as with Jim and Tammy Faye. No word games involved.
(edit) Oh, and this character. G-r-i-f-t.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/goldie-taylorwhere-did-all-the-money-shaun-king-raised-for-black-lives-go

And no word games here either: I'm sick to death of the divisive us vs them tribal garbage, from wherever it comes, or however righteous/unrighteous, holy/unholy and saintly/sinful we want to think this person or that group is. Clear enough? Done.

[Madiel]

This is unclear and depends on whom you ask, of course. According to Roland Fryer's research, blacks are indeed stopped disproportionately and more likely to experience disproportionate force, but not more likely to be shot than whites in a given interaction with cops. Of course his work has been criticized and defended. Pretty much any statistics are going to get different interpretations.
Here's the conservative Manhattan Institute:

"On-duty police fatally shoot about 1,000 people every year. This number and its racial breakdown have remained remarkably steady since 2015. The overall Post tally has ranged from a low of 958 in 2016, to a "record" of 1,055 in 2021 (reported as this paper went to press), with any pattern difficult to distinguish from random chance."

"Approximately a quarter of those killed are black. This is roughly double the black share of the overall population, but it is in line with—and sometimes below—many other "bench-marks" that one might use for comparison, such as the racial breakdowns of arrests, murders, and violent-crime offenders as reported by victims in surveys."

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/verbruggen-fatal-police-shootings

My question for you is: Could you be wrong in your interpretation? If you ask me the same question, well, first I'd have to give you mine. It is that the situation is unclear. There's definitely racism. It's not everywhere and in everything and not apparent in many of the cases people have protested (Atlanta, Kenosha). But I'm not surprised if racism is a serious problem in some situations. Plus, this atmosphere created by BLM and these protests could have made crime worse in black neighborhoods if cops pull back. This is something Fryer has studied somewhere (I'll have to look for a link) - I believe in Ferguson.

(I did find a bunch of links, from The Atlantic to the WSJ. Here's the Manhattan again. I know it's conservative but it has no firewall. You can read about Fryer's study at least: https://www.manhattan-institute.org/verbruggen-depolicing-alternatives)

However, I may be getting this wrong. BLM may actually go down as a group that really did help the country overall. For me, I'm a bit in the fence in that the greater awareness of how police treat people (and minority people) has got to produce some good somewhere. At the moment, I kind of feel like all these protesters would do a million times more for everyone by just getting involved in programs to help reach young people in at-risk places or situations - stuff like that.

Sorry, I don't understand what your problem is. You seem to think that so long as the reason that black people die more often is because the police interact with them more often, you can just stop there and not ask why it is that the police interact with black people more often.

I'm not suggesting that police are going around deliberately homicidal towards black people. Even George Floyd's murder falls in the category of extreme recklessness rather than intent. So sure, black people die more often because police interact with them more often. How you think that makes my "interpretation" wrong I've no idea.

[milk]

Sorry, I don't understand what your problem is. You seem to think that so long as the reason that black people die more often is because the police interact with them more often, you can just stop there and not ask why it is that the police interact with black people more often.

I'm not suggesting that police are going around deliberately homicidal towards black people. Even George Floyd's murder falls in the category of extreme recklessness rather than intent. So sure, black people die more often because police interact with them more often. How you think that makes my "interpretation" wrong I've no idea.

Yes that's right. You'd have to do better in understanding the argument of folks who disagree with you. Yes. Read the articles I quoted from. Watch Loury and McWhorter discuss these issues on YouTube. Have you ever watched them? Glenn Loury, a well-respected economist, used to have a show on bloggerheads channel but he might just have his own channel now. They're interesting and entertaining (there are plenty of other people out there that push back against your side of things but I find Loury and McWhorter credible and accessible and fun to watch). If you don't understand what they're saying then your own arguments might not be very sharp. Basically, the argument is that black people are not disproportionately killed by police. You're right that they are disproportionately involved in violent crime. You're right to ask why. The answer isn't simple. If it were simple, it'd be easy to solve. I'm sure you and I agree on some of the reasons, though I suspect neither of us has all the answers. As I mentioned before, some of the incidents that BLM protested were justified shootings IMO (Kenosha/Atlanta). Obviously Floyd was a straight up murder. To me, BLM is a mixed bag. I can't see how the endless protesting in a place like Kenosha, after a justified police shooting, makes sense as it further damaged that community. And I thought it was bizarre that the criminal in that case got a presidential visit. On the other hand, the guy that was murdered in Minneapolis by a cop (who walked on it), before the Floyd murder, showed how racism can clearly exists in a pattern that ended in a death. But anyway, I digress...

[Madiel]

I didn't say they were disproportionately involved in violent crime and neither did you. Being arrested more often does NOT mean committed a crime more often. Police decisions as to who to arrest or even question are not neutral and purely objective, and it's foolish to think otherwise.

Plus of course there are some VERY high profile examples of people clearly not committing any crime who die at the hands of police. Nor is it necessary for your crime to be violent for you to be at risk of death.

[milk]

I didn't say they were disproportionately involved in violent crime and neither did you. Being arrested more often does NOT mean committed a crime more often. Police decisions as to who to arrest or even question are not neutral and purely objective, and it's foolish to think otherwise.

I see what you're saying. You believe the higher arrest and conviction stats on violent crime are manufactured by racist targeting of black people? That's interesting. This thinking leads to another problem: that of the victims. The higher number is reflected in the victims too. More black people are victimized by crime, according to these same statistics. In places like Minneapolis where funding was reduced in an attempt to transition away from policing, there was outcry and pushback. I'd have to research that further but the Fryer research in the article I linked to suggests and obvious consequence of running with your ball on this.
Can I ask how you're coming to this conclusion? Are black people victims of violent crime in larger numbers and proportions? Or is that a cooked stat?

[Madiel]

I see what you're saying. You believe the higher arrest and conviction stats on violent crime are manufactured by racist targeting of black people? That's interesting. This thinking leads to another problem: that of the victims. The higher number is reflected in the victims too. More black people are victimized by crime, according to these same statistics. In places like Minneapolis where funding was reduced in an attempt to transition away from policing, there was outcry and pushback. I'd have to research that further but the Fryer research in the article I linked to suggests and obvious consequence of running with your ball on this.
Can I ask how you're coming to this conclusion? Are black people victims of violent crime in larger numbers and proportions? Or is that a cooked stat?

It is more complex than that and I have neither the time nor the inclination to thrash it out here.

There's a tone in some of your posts of suggesting that the higher rate of black deaths is THEIR fault, and maybe that it doesn't need to be fixed. Well in my view it does. Even IF it arises from higher crime rates (rather than just higher rates of police interactions) it still needs to be fixed.

The American attachment to the death penalty is a whole other issue, but even in America the legal view is that people are supposed to be put on trial for their crimes and punished after that. And the death penalty is not available for selling illegal cigarettes. It's certainly not available for a kid playing with a toy gun.

It's not only police but entire community attitudes. A black man in your neighbourhood? Call the police. A black man driving a fancy car? Call the police. It's a self perpetuating cycle of not just crimes being committed but of BELIEVING they're being committed. It also works the other way of characterising white misdemeanours as trivial and not meriting punishment.

Righto. I have work to do.

[milk]

It is more complex than that and I have neither the time nor the inclination to thrash it out here.

There's a tone in some of your posts of suggesting that the higher rate of black deaths is THEIR fault, and maybe that it doesn't need to be fixed. Well in my view it does. Even IF it arises from higher crime rates (rather than just higher rates of police interactions) it still needs to be fixed.

Weird. That's all I can say. I would never blame victims for suffering through a crime.

[greg]

Then try giving us actual real-world examples. If you can't do that then start asking yourself if you've been worrying about something that isn't a real problem.

Literally any business that hires based on discriminatory practices that need to meet some sort of quota based on race/gender, it's under the philosophy of equity. (Which is currently illegal).

Not to mention that if we allow that type of discrimination based on race/gender, then it could go the other way as well, an employer could say, for example, no to black women because they wanted all white men. (Just another potential problem/can of worms).

Just pointing out the difference between the equity vs. egalitarianism (equal opportunity) way of doing things. One requires force, the other allows for freedom. So I prefer the latter.

There is no need to give real-world examples because the original post was solely about the concepts. I made no such point about anything specific, or that I'm "worried" about it.
for reference, original post: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,30359.msg1455823.html#msg1455823

And stop listening to the "sources" who made you believe it was.

And you're wasting everybody's time having us disprove this nonsense to you that you're now trying to duck rather than just admitting you were uninformed or misinformed..

You're going to have to quote what I wrote specifically, because I have no idea what you're referencing.
Misinformed about what?

And that is greg through and through.

Do you actually have anything to say?

Please make that 'violent death'.

However, you're talking to a giant void.

Wtf are you even doing? You quoted me talking about something entirely different, an entirely different concept. 
I have to ask, are we even allowed to talk about concepts here? Or does everyone have the sort of autism where people think everything is super specific and literal, and literally everything conceptual is not understood?

Also funny how you consider me a giant void, when that's what you are. You can't even accurately summarize anything I say.
Not to mention Karl not even saying anything, that's another void itself.

Everyone else's greater problems... but the biggest struggle... but trivalizing...

There is not a "pushback" against All Lives Matter. All Lives Matter was the pushback. It was the pushback against actually acknowledging which demographic has a bigger struggle. Your complaint is that people have reacted negatively to a slogan that was expressly designed to disclaim the power of the original slogan.

George Floyd was murdered by a police officer. Please explain what problem is greater than being killed. There are plenty of other cases of black people dying at the hands of police which I don't consider murder but which certainly involve fairly profound levels of recklessness.

Do only black people die at the hands of police? No. But they die disproportionately. And that was my point to you: the relative value of white lives wasn't in question in the first place. Black Lives Matter arose because there was a history of not regarding the loss of black lives as being as significant as the loss of white lives. A history of accepting a rate of black deaths that would be completely unacceptable if white lives were lost at the same rate.

And the slogan All Lives Matter was intended to erase that disparity, to say once again that the disparity didn't matter.

Black Lives Matter doesn't trivialise anyone's struggle, not least because it isn't about "struggle". It's about death. I don't know what problem you think is greater than death. And the fundamental issue is that the life expectancy of one race is lower.

Dude, if you want to view All Lives Matter as a pushback, then go ahead.
You could also view it as other people wanting to be included, or people wanting to give a broader context to things, that police brutality affects everyone. Because that's what it is to many people.
There is nothing in the "All Lives Matter" slogan that says there is no disparity among demographics experiencing police brutality.
So someone who experiences police brutality who isn't black should not get a cause, then, because they in the minority demographic of victims? Oh ok, they are Asian and experience police brutality. Well, screw them, I guess.
(and the easiest way to popularize the cause of raising awareness to all victims of police brutality would be to ride the wave of another existing cause... like BLM... hmmm maybe call it ALM?)

[SimonNZ]

There is no need to give real-world examples

Then you're wasting our time with a fear that is merely in your uninformed head.

Because I don't believe you have any idea about the who or where or how of any "quotas" that may or may not exist. I think you simply see a woman or black person doing a job and make assumptions about quotas without evidence.

The problem is yours, not anyone else's.

[Herman]

Dude, if you want to view All Lives Matter as a pushback, then go ahead.
You could also view it as other people wanting to be included, or people wanting to give a broader context to things, that police brutality affects everyone. Because that's what it is to many people.

Just look at the real numbers. Police brutality affects minorities much more.

I, as a very white man with a top education could sweet talk myself out of bank robbery. A black Harvard professor famously got arrested for entering his own home.

All Lives Matter was invented to void BLM, it is a typical right wing snark, and you're lapping it up because it suits you. The whole 'concepts' thing is BS.

[Madiel]

Dude, if you want to view All Lives Matter as a pushback, then go ahead.
You could also view it as other people wanting to be included, or people wanting to give a broader context to things, that police brutality affects everyone. Because that's what it is to many people.
There is nothing in the "All Lives Matter" slogan that says there is no disparity among demographics experiencing police brutality.
So someone who experiences police brutality who isn't black should not get a cause, then, because they in the minority demographic of victims? Oh ok, they are Asian and experience police brutality. Well, screw them, I guess.
(and the easiest way to popularize the cause of raising awareness to all victims of police brutality would be to ride the wave of another existing cause... like BLM... hmmm maybe call it ALM?)

Due, All Lives Matter wasn't a thing until after Black Lives Matter was.

And no, police brutality does not "affect everyone". You seem intent on discounting the relevance of statistics and probability. I mean, sure, there might be some chance of a wealthy white man being beat up by police. But it's a very small chance, and you don't seem to think it's remotely relevant to think about whether everybody should face the same chance of being beat up by police.

Presumably you don't think it's a problem that American women are way more likely to die in childbirth than women in a lot of other countries, because dying in childbirth is a risk for every pregnant woman. There are 2 or 3 states that have managed to buck this trend... largely by studying what happens in other countries where women die a lot less.

Maybe you don't think it's a problem that Americans face death by random shooting far more frequently than people in other countries, because hey, the risk in other countries isn't zero. 3 people died in Denmark this week.

If you insist on saying that something affects everybody, you completely avoid examining risk factors. Completely. And risk factors are the whole issue. We will never, ever prevent all unfortunate deaths at the hands of police so long as we have meaningful policing, just as we will never, ever prevent all deaths in car crashes so long as we have meaningful use of cars for transport. But saying that every person in a car is at some risk of dying in a crash is a really lame excuse for not looking at all of the ways that the rate of death can be reduced - car design (seatbelts, air bags, crumple zones etc etc etc), road design, speed limits, driver training, alcohol limits.

If you insist on All Lives Matter, what you're insisting on is being blind to the reality that some lives are at greater risk than others. And in doing so, you give yourself an excuse for not examining the risk factors.

[Madiel]

Weird. That's all I can say. I would never blame victims for suffering through a crime.

Right. So presumably you don't think black people are inherently more criminal, and consequently don't think that black people having more encounters with police (which on your data leads to being killed by more police more often) is some sort of 'natural' state of affairs that can't be changed.

Because in past generations plenty of people believed exactly that sort of thing.

[milk]

Right. So presumably you don't think black people are inherently more criminal, and consequently don't think that black people having more encounters with police (which on your data leads to being killed by more police more often) is some sort of 'natural' state of affairs that can't be changed.

Don't be a goof.

[Todd]

[DizzyD]

...
I, as a very white man with a top education could sweet talk myself out of bank robbery. ...

Come on now. That is absolutely not true. It sounds good and in line with current orthodoxy, but it simply isn't true. Otherwise banks would be empty. Unless of course you're suggesting that whites have less of an inclination to steal. Logic, logic, logic. I'm sorry, but a lot of this thread reads like an episode of The View.

[fbjim]

There have been high profile news stories about unjustified police brutality where white men were victimized - the most egregious and infuriating being Daniel Shaver.

Despite some of these getting news coverage, they tend not to be particular causes of protests, because- to be blunt, the "All Lives Matter" crew never cared enough to do so. Frankly when I see these mentioned, they're nearly always done as rhetorical "gotchas".

[DizzyD]

There have been high profile news stories about unjustified police brutality where white men were victimized - the most egregious and infuriating being Daniel Shaver.

Despite some of these getting news coverage, they tend not to be particular causes of protests, because- to be blunt, the "All Lives Matter" crew never cared enough to do so. ...

Nor probably did the media care enough to cover it thoroughly. Not enough potential for group vs group conflict.