Discussion: Racism - Part 3

[Mad Ones]

You don’t care that a woman was punched by a man because of her race. You either don’t care in general that a man punched a woman or you think she deserved it because of the color of her skin. You can’t even say that’s wrong what happened even if you disagree. Either way, what a terrible person you are. You cry racism yet are racist. You accuse the other side of no empathy but don’t show any. You preach inclusion but demand exclusion. You scream war on women but throw them under the bus if they aren’t on your side. You are the militant left...listening to the echo chamber.

History is a teaching tool, not an overbearing stone certain people must carry. If you want to start a thread about White People Being Racist, by all means. I’ll keep posting in here and allow you to shed light on your true nature.

Your posts are so removed from reality. If you care about violence against women, why don't you participate meaningfully in the Me Too movement or champion feminist perspectives on culture? You talk about using women, but you coming in here to strategically post that article was exactly that. That's a ****ed up situation, but it's not the same thing as stories about white people using police to control public space in ways that exclude or criminalize racialized folks. If you can't see the difference, than you are choosing to live in ignorance. Your agenda is so transparent and you treat this topic like a sick game.

Unsurprisingly, you talk about history like someone privileged from it.

Has there been any indication that race was involved here, or was this a piece of **** committing violence against a women, regardless of race?

None.

 

[Aximili86]

If you care about violence against women, why don't you participate meaningfully in the Me Too movement or champion feminist perspectives on culture?

*Giggles* Oh, you.

Let's not do this "you're not a hardcore feminist who thinks gender studies is a legitimate major, safe spaces are a good idea, and #MeToo doesn't cause any potential social problems when they get it wrong - so you support hitting women" thing.

That's starting with a good, real point - violence against women is a problem - and taking it to the usual ridiculous partisan points-scoring extent. Doesn't help anyone. The Chaseter guy's absolutely right that the race factor's intentionally played down in that article, too, the shoe's on the other foot and "white ____ attacks black ____" is going to be the lede they run with.

Honestly kind of surprised nobody's up-in-arms about the co-worker producing a pistols, either. The fact that article's not playing up "unarmed black man has gun pointed at him!" is at least something positive in a contextual sense.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Yep, the lady in Houston who accused the officer of sexual assault and this story as well, a preacher who blatantly lied about a stop: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...sident-claimed-he-was-racially-1826069258/amp

This is why body cams are so important, for not just when police do the wrong thing but when they are in the right and it's a "victim" who is wrong.

Ahem...

Yeah, because it's only false reports about police misconduct or harassment that few White Americans would put up with if they were subject to it regularly... RIGHT?

[YT]m63qcaubuCU[/YT]


[YT]39dcY7lLY7M[/YT]


[YT]jTAQvldnijk[/YT]


Before the usual suspects show up... No, not every interactions between law enforcement and people of color end in tragedy. No, not every time a law enforcement officer uses force, even deadly force against suspects that are citizens of color is it unwarranted or unjustified. It's a terribly difficult job with terrible weight which will always include the responsibility to use violence. Such is the nature of the job. However it's frankly disingenuous to imply (and don't piss in my ears and tell me it's rain that's what the quoted post is about) that the body cameras will only be useful to showcase false allegations against police as if there aren't already consequences for such actions within the legal system. How about maybe body cams will also be useful in keeping individuals in law enforcement from abusing their authority and harassing citizens? Because, and this always floors me that the people that cry so loudly about this stuff are "Conservative/Libertarian/Limited Government" types but... The treatment of your fellow citizens of color in this country? It's a canary in the coal mine for the general, actual governmental overreach and abuse that actually can and does affect real people in the real world directly. Too many in law enforcement have gotten away with abuse and harassment which you all justify and hand wave. But as the media show REGULARLY these days, equality is indeed coming... Only it's now "White" American citizens as well that are seeing that there are consequences to uncritical support of law enforcement despite oodles of evidence that there has been far more abuse going on than we care to admit to. That doesn't mean everyone in uniform is a thug with a badge or is abusing their power, but let's remind ourselves that we do invest these people with far ranging powers, which includes the power to kill and it seems that there's a lot of killing going on that didn't justify it. And as I said... It's a canary in the coal mine. These following incidents:


[YT]7Ooa7wOKHhg[/YT]


[YT]0mezvCg0A5c[/YT]


[YT]5mRhmFcjs4M[/YT]

The people killed were White Americans. We, the citizens should not have to fear from law enforcement if we are innocent of wrong doing, and, as radical as this might seem, yes even when we are guilty of wrong doing one shouldn't fear for our lives from police. I know this blows the minds of some for reasons I can't begin to fathom but no, stealing a six pack from a corner store is not somehow justification in a civilized society of laws for police to exercise some, heretofore unknown to the general public, right to extrajudicial
public execution for whatever crime they wish. And I repeat... This seems to be happening more these days. So let's not pretend that the best part about bodycams for the average citizen is that it's stopping frivolous charges against police when the direct affect might well be that it probably keeps more cops on the straight and narrow than we would care to admit to. And since I know it will come, again from all the usual suspects around here, yeah... You can post all the videos of police getting shot by criminals all you want as if that somehow disproves my argument. It doesn't. As I already stated it's a terribly risky job we ask cops to perform. But that there is risk doesn't justify we as citizens having a cavalier attitude about abuse because, AGAIN, maybe, I don't know... citizens have rights? Yes, even guilty perpetrators of minor offenses. If a cop gets into a physical engagement well all else fails, then yes, lethal force should of course be on the table. If a cop is fired up by armed criminals, then yes they should use lethal for to protect themselves. If police feel that a suspect is an immediate threat to others I of course think they should use lethal force... but look at the examples above. That's far from those scenarios present themselves as, and again, AGAIN... posting videos that show when it was justified by police to use lethal force doesn't negate the events in the videos I posted. That's not how things work, nor is it how they should work morally or legally. Being critical when necessary of police actions when they have been charged with the ability to dispense state sanctioned violence would, one assumes if they are genuinely committed to the principals they espouse so very loudly, be something that Libertarians/Conservatives could get behind... Yet online and in the real world they sure seem to show a metric ton of equivocation and rationalization on these issues and it makes a lot of us wonder what motivates that?

 

[Aximili86]

He didn't say only false reports. He was saying false reports are a thing, and that bodycams instantly dispell when that happens.

Nothing more.

 

[Docker2.0]

Yeah well, the videos he just showed will be ignore huh?

 

[ban768]

Permit Patty showed no racism other than being white and calling the cops on an innocent black girl. Yet, that was discussed in lengths as being racist yes? Permit Patty was wrong regardless of race. If Permit Patty was racist, which I would say she was, then Punching Paul is racist as I would bet he wouldn’t have punched a black mother. It’s the same thing. My point was how the media don’t highlight black on white crime like the do white on black crime. Why? Why does Permit Patty make national news, SNL, etc. but nobody cares about the sentencing of the 4 black teens that beat the white disabled teen? Why? Racism of any color is horrible but it seems some people in here prefer one side and those people are losing their empathy. Just a few pages back there is racism against Jews in here...

You can’t live in an echo chamber...this thread is an echo chamber.

This happens a lot. At the Wisconsin State Fair you were before allowed just to walk right in after paying and now their policy is that all patrons and possessions are subject to search and will pass through metal detection upon entering the Fair Park. Fairgoers under 18 years of age entering after 6 pm must be accompanied by a parent or guardian 21 years of age or older.

This is all due to an incident in 2011 where "dozens to hundreds of black youths attacked white people as they left the fair, punching and kicking people and shaking and pounding on their vehicles. Witnesses and police reported two separate incidents of mobs of unruly youths on Thursday night, resulting in at least 11 injuries and 31 arrests. Seven of the injured were police officers, and two were hospitalized.

The violence is similar to what occurred in Milwaukee's Riverwest neighborhood over the July 4 holiday, when about 60 young people beat and robbed a smaller group that had been watching fireworks from Kilbourn Reservoir Park. The injured people were white; the attackers were African-American, witnesses said. Another group looted a convenience store."

Did the national media harp on about this. Of course not. If the media is up in arms with a couple white people calling the cops on someone who is African American over entering a pool or selling water. Just think how they would of reacted if hundreds of whites were targeting and attacking only black families who are just trying to enjoy a fair and watching the fireworks. It seems to me for it to be a hate crime against a white person a person of color would have to say right into a camera I am attacking you because you are white since I hate white people. Even then you would still find people jumping through hoops to make it not a hate crime.



http://archive.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/126828998.html/

 

[Aximili86]

Yeah well, the videos he just showed will be ignore huh?

Not ignored. Individual cops do the wrong thing, same as individual cops do the right thing.

Point is, bodycams are a plus in both cases. Catching cops in the wrong and proving accusations didn't happen or their actions were justified alike. In both situations, you want the footage, make the things mandatory and on the government dime, pronto.

 

[Mad Ones]

*Giggles* Oh, you.

Let's not do this "you're not a hardcore feminist who thinks gender studies is a legitimate major, safe spaces are a good idea, and #MeToo doesn't cause any potential social problems when they get it wrong - so you support hitting women" thing.

That's starting with a good, real point - violence against women is a problem - and taking it to the usual ridiculous partisan points-scoring extent. Doesn't help anyone. The Chaseter guy's absolutely right that the race factor's intentionally played down in that article, too, the shoe's on the other foot and "white ____ attacks black ____" is going to be the lede they run with.

Honestly kind of surprised nobody's up-in-arms about the co-worker producing a pistols, either. The fact that article's not playing up "unarmed black man has gun pointed at him!" is at least something positive in a contextual sense.

Suddenly you care so much about violence against women as soon as it serves anti-blackness, in a thread about racism no less. The point of posting that article was to objectify that woman and her concussion in the service of a narrative of dangerous black men. If we want to talk about violence against women, lets talk about how men in general are a danger to women, rather than racialize that danger in the form of a black man, and how we can change that (maybe starting by not discrediting the important work that comes out of women and gender studies). I have no idea how the mods let this thread become like this. Go back to the Trump thread and defend him some more to show how much you care about violence against women.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Not ignored. Individual cops do the wrong thing, same as individual cops do the right thing.

Point is, bodycams are a plus in both cases. Catching cops in the wrong and proving accusations didn't happen or their actions were justified alike. In both situations, you want the footage, make the things mandatory and on the government dime, pronto.

If body cams are such a plus for cops, who do we have actual evidence of an entire police force destroying their recording equipment and going unpunished for it? Why do we have footage of cops telling other cops to turn them off, and those cops doing as told?

 

[CaptainWagner]

Body cams honestly sometimes make the severity of the problem even worse. Because now we have clear proof of wrongdoing, and the officers are STILL let off without serious repercussions in most cases. If law enforcement is not held to a higher standard than the citizenry, there can be no law and order. And as of today in America, the standards for our law enforcement are virtually non-existent. And that is incredibly dangerous for a society.

 

[Aximili86]

Suddenly you care so much about violence against women as soon as it serves anti-blackness, in a thread about racism no less. The point of posting that article was to objectify that woman and her concussion in the service of a narrative of dangerous black men. If we want to talk about violence against women, lets talk about how men in general are a danger to women, rather than racialize that danger in the form of a black man, and how we can change that (maybe starting by not discrediting the important work that comes out of women and gender studies). I have no idea how the mods let this thread become like this. Go back to the Trump thread and defend him some more to show how much you care about violence against women.

Bull****. What it seems the guy was getting at in posting the reference to this is the convenient dismissal, this barely getting covered in the news. The racial makeup of those involved shouldn't matter in these cases, only it does with the reaction.

Simmer down a little there, too. People disagreeing with you on issues isn't grounds for the knee-jerk clapping-trained-seal "racist sexist!" outbursts.

 

[Mad Ones]

Bull****. What it seems the guy was getting at in posting the reference to this is the convenient dismissal, this barely getting covered in the news. The racial makeup of those involved shouldn't matter in these cases, only it does with the reaction.

Simmer down a little there, too. People disagreeing with you on issues isn't grounds for the knee-jerk clapping-trained-seal "racist sexist!" outbursts.

Nah, it's important to cut through the dog whistles and call this stuff on what it is. You're having the same kind of conversation in like three different threads so you come here for this kind of action right? Bait, shame, run.

 

[Aximili86]

Easy accusation to make when you want to simply avoid any good-faith discussion. Enjoy the lock-step, buddy, people with critical thinking can see where both sides of any given issue are coming from.

But yeah, this is where we are now, 2018. Trump's a symptom of this crap, not the genesis.

Also, "dog-whistle" is pretty much as much a moronic buzzword as the ridiculous "fake news" term on the other side of the fence. So nice one on that, keep running that familiar treadmill.

 

[Mad Ones]

Easy accusation to make when you want to simply avoid any good-faith discussion. Enjoy the lock-step, buddy, people with critical thinking can see where both sides of any given issue are coming from.

But yeah, this is where we are now, 2018. Trump's a symptom of this crap, not the genesis.

Also, "dog-whistle" is pretty much as much a moronic buzzword as the ridiculous "fake news" term on the other side of the fence. So nice one on that, keep running that familiar treadmill.

If you think the definition of racism starts and ends with the dictionary, than you don't have a clue what critical thinking is. Your version of "critical thinking" got Trump elected and reinforced every hegemonic norm. There's no point continuing this "discussion" because you clearly hate anything that gives people different from you the language to defend themselves and describe their experiences (I wonder why). You'll continue caring about violence against women when it serves a "whites are victims too narrative" while making fun of feminism and gender studies, you'll keep explaining with authority what civil rights was for and the difference between proper and improper protests, and you'll defend America's racist president. But you're screaming against the wind on an anonymous message board.

 

[Travesty]

So you think "critical thinking" is about making up subjective terms, to try and redefine words, so that you can bend the argument in your favor? I thought critical thinking was to apply logical and reason to new ideas, not to redefine terms to try and bend the ideas into your favor, due to the logic not holding up.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Racism can be done by anyone of any race. But predominantly racism is done against minorities in America. That is where the argument from the right falls apart. They try to equivocate incidents, as if it is in the same realm as what minorities have to deal with on the regular. This is how we get the clearly false idea that there is an attack on white America.

Just think of the everyday racism we hear about everyday. That we have video evidence of. Stuff that if you are a white in the US, you don't need to deal with it. Using your pool, working on a house, BBQ'ing, mowing your lawn, talking to your constituents, walking home, being in your own backyard, selling water, etc. These are not things that get the cops called on white Americans. It is not a thing. And is it any coincidence that the ones who call the cops are almost always white?

 

[Mad Ones]

So you think "critical thinking" is about making up subjective terms, to try and redefine words, so that you can bend the argument in your favor? I thought critical thinking was to apply logical and reason to new ideas, not to redefine terms to try and bend the ideas into your favor, due to the logic not holding up.

What is this even referring to?

Are you not aware that the meanings of words change and evolve over time? One form of critical thinking is the close examination of words and their fraught meanings, contexts, and histories.

Also, who do you think defines what is objective and subjective? Because things like phrenology used to be objective science.

 

[DeadPresident]

Racism can be done by anyone of any race. But predominantly racism is done against minorities in America. That is where the argument from the right falls apart. They try to equivocate incidents, as if it is in the same realm as what minorities have to deal with on the regular. This is how we get the clearly false idea that there is an attack on white America.

Just think of the everyday racism we hear about everyday. That we have video evidence of. Stuff that if you are a white in the US, you don't need to deal with it. Using your pool, working on a house, BBQ'ing, mowing your lawn, talking to your constituents, walking home, being in your own backyard, selling water, etc. These are not things that get the cops called on white Americans. It is not a thing. And is it any coincidence that the ones who call the cops are almost always white?

According to progressives setting the agenda racism can not be done by any race - "racism" and it's nouveau definition implies white people using economic, social, and political power to subjugate non-whites. Racism per its new connotation reads as follows: "White people using their privileged, stolen, and pillaged economic, political, and social power to create barriers to prosperity for any non-whites". Ask Mad Ones - it's in every critical xxxxx book on every campus that wants to be seen as progressive.

Conveniently the same progressives don't find that kind of hegemonic power problematic when it occurs anywhere else in the world, but only when whites do it in predominantly white countries. Arabs subjugating minority religion groups across the ME isn't a problem, black Africans excluding other black Africans along tribal lines isn't a problem, Asians socially segregating along caste lines isn't a problem.

The part where the argument from the left falls apart is that it only cares about systemic prejudice perpetrated by whites and will forever overlook it from anyone else, even if it does occur in the West. That double standard and petty anti-whiteness is at least partially to blame for the rise in white nationalism all over the West, despicable as it might be every group sticks together when it perceives it is being unfairly persecuted.

What else explains the recent rise in black nationalism, too?

 

[Mad Ones]

According to progressives setting the agenda racism can not be done by any race - "racism" and it's nouveau definition implies white people using economic, social, and political power to subjugate non-whites.

Conveniently the same progressives don't find that kind of hegemonic power problematic when it occurs anywhere else in the world, but only when whites do it in predominantly white countries.

The part where the argument from the left falls apart is that it only cares about systemic prejudice perpetrated by whites and will forever overlook it from anyone else, even if it does occur. That double standard and petty anti-whiteness is at least partially to blame for the rise in white nationalism all over the West, despicable as it might be every group sticks together when it perceives it is being unfairly persecuted.

What else explains the recent rise in black nationalism, too?

Do you have any actual examples of "progressives" not caring when "that kind of hegemonic power problematic" occurs anywhere else in the world?

Because people have been writing about how anti-blackness exists all over the world. Remember when the winner of the Miss Japan pageant was Japanese-Indian and there was a huge racist backlash because she was too dark? People are very critical of the racism in Japan. People have been writing about how anti-indigeniety exists in a lot of places too.

 

[Sithborg]

http://abc13.com/society/property-manager-calls-cops-on-man-for-wearing-socks-in-pool--/3718670/

Seriously, why would you call the police over a dress code violation?

 

[RockSP]

Do you have any actual examples of "progressives" not caring when "that kind of hegemonic power problematic" occurs anywhere else in the world?

Because people have been writing about how anti-blackness exists all over the world. Remember when the winner of the Miss Japan pageant was Japanese-Indian and there was a huge racist backlash because she was too dark? People are very critical of the racism in Japan. People have been writing about how anti-indigeniety exists in a lot of places too.

She's half Japanese, half black (unless there is yet another mixed race controversial pageant winner that I'm unaware of...which wouldn't be surprising).

 

[DarthSkywalker]

According to progressives setting the agenda racism can not be done by any race - "racism" and it's nouveau definition implies white people using economic, social, and political power to subjugate non-whites. Racism per its new connotation reads as follows: "White people using their privileged, stolen, and pillaged economic, political, and social power to create barriers to prosperity for any non-whites". Ask Mad Ones - it's in every critical xxxxx book on every campus that wants to be seen as progressive.

Conveniently the same progressives don't find that kind of hegemonic power problematic when it occurs anywhere else in the world, but only when whites do it in predominantly white countries. Arabs subjugating minority religion groups across the ME isn't a problem, black Africans excluding other black Africans along tribal lines isn't a problem, Asians socially segregating along caste lines isn't a problem.

The part where the argument from the left falls apart is that it only cares about systemic prejudice perpetrated by whites and will forever overlook it from anyone else, even if it does occur in the West. That double standard and petty anti-whiteness is at least partially to blame for the rise in white nationalism all over the West, despicable as it might be every group sticks together when it perceives it is being unfairly persecuted.

What else explains the recent rise in black nationalism, too?

Racism is based on race. While utterly horrible, treating people different based on their religion or a class system, isn't racism without a racial component. This the treatment of the LGBTQA community is awful in many places. Same for the general treatment of women. And that is terrible. But that isn't racism. It's not the same thing, and to claim it is, is strange.

Also the bold part is factually wrong. Look at the Israel/Palestine situation. Who is seeking to see Israel held accountable? How about the North Korea situation? Systemic prejudice against the LGBTQA community or women isn't being fought against by the right. Relief to those in African, including children and African women is coming from who?

 

[DeadPresident]

Do you have any actual examples of "progressives" not caring when "that kind of hegemonic power problematic" occurs anywhere else in the world?

Because people have been writing about how anti-blackness exists all over the world. Remember when the winner of the Miss Japan pageant was Japanese-Indian and there was a huge racist backlash because she was too dark? People are very critical of the racism in Japan. People have been writing about how anti-indigeniety exists in a lot of places too.

Sure - how about my two years of language, gender, and sexuality, critical linguistics, sociolinguistics, and critical discourse analysis course where it never popped up? I was taught primarily about how cis-gendered, heteronormative, caucasian males were the proverbial cancer eroding everyone else's chances at prosperity.

I don't remember this Miss Japan thing, but I'm not stateside which might influence the chances that I would've seen it.

If you're completely objective and take your own personal investment in this way, wouldn't you agree that negative white -> black interactions get a skewed amount of air time? I'm not denying all the things posted in this thread occur, and that they occur far more than they normatively should, but wouldn't you say considering all the issues in the USA that this specific category seems to get a questionable amount of focus? Especially considering Hispanics are a larger group in the US population.

It just seems counter-productive to have an environment where the media creates a hysterical panic that leads people to believe 'the USA is the most racist country in the world', that doesn't help the conversation nor does it move in a direction where race relations improve, IMO.

 

[Mad Ones]

She's half Japanese, half black (unless there is yet another mixed race controversial pageant winner that I'm unaware of...which wouldn't be surprising).

I was referring to Pryianka Yoshikawas whose father is Indian and mother is Japanese. It also wouldn't surprise me if there was another case, but I know a lot of racists cited her "darkness" as a reason why she shouldn't have won.

Those racist responses to Black Panther was another thing that got a lot of attention in North America.

 

[RockSP]

I was referring to Pryianka Yoshikawas whose father is Indian and mother is Japanese. It also wouldn't surprise me if there was another case, but I know a lot of racists cited her "darkness" as a reason why she shouldn't have won.

Those racist responses to Black Panther was another thing that got a lot of attention in North America.

Ah. So another mixed race controversial pageant winner that I was unaware of, then. Heh. I thought you were talking about Ariana Miyamoto.