Jump to content
270soft Forum

How Anti-Racist Are You Poll


How to be an Anti-Racist Poll  

6 members have voted

  1. 1. Check all of the below that you DISAGREE with:

    • Denial is the heartbeat of racism.
    • Saying one is "not racist" signifies neutrality: "I am not a racist, but neither am I aggressively against racism." 
    • The opposite of "racist" is not "not racist." It is "anti-racist."
    • Racist and anti-racist are not fixed identities. We can be racist one minute and an antiracist the next. 
    • A racist is one who is supporting a racist policy through their actions or inactions or expressing a racist idea. 
    • Racism is a marriage of racist policies and racist ideas that produce and normalizes racial inequities.
    • The fact that 71% of White families live in owner-occupied homes, while only 45% of Hispanics and 41% of Blacks do is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed.
      0
    • There is no such thing as a race-neutral or nonracist policy, as each policy produces or sustains racial inequity or racial equity. 
    • We all have the power to discriminate. Only a few have the power to make policy.
    • The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination
    • The most threatening racist movement is not the "Alt-Right" but the regular American's drive for a "race-neutral" country. 
    • Racial groups are equals in all their apparant differences--there is nothing right or wrong with any racial group.
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: White people are more likely than Black and Hispanic people to sell drugs, and the races consume drugs at similar rates; yet, Blacks are more likely to be jailed for drug offenses. 
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Non-violent Black drug offenders stay in prison for about the same length of time as violent White drug offenders
    • High unemployment corresponds with violent crime; racial minorities do not correspond with violent crime.
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Black people comprise 13% of the population and at least 26% of those killed by police. 
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Unarmed black men are twice as likely to be killed by police as unarmed white men. 
    • There is no such thing as a dangerous racial group; there are only dangerous individuals. 
      0
    • Colorism is a serious issue among blacks and whites, creating inequities between light color blacks and dark color blacks. 
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Lighter skin people are more likely to receive good paying jobs and get accepted to better schools than dark skin people. 
    • Racist ideas suspend reality and retrofit history, including individual histories
    • Increased voter suppression in the states is making it harder for minorities to vote out people who are not promoting anti-racist policies.
    • A large percentage of black people hold anti-black racist ideas. That is, ideas that sustain or increase racial inequity. 
      0
    • Black people can be racist because black people do have power, even if limited. 
      0
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Only 27% of white cops think the issue of blacks being killed more often than whites by violent cops are signs of a broader problem, compared to the 57% of black cops. 
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: The black poverty rate is 3x the white poverty rate
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Black unemployment is 2x that of white unemployment
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: The median net worth of white families is 10x more than black families
    • To love capitalism is to end up loving racism
    • The idea of the dangerous black neighborhood is the most dangerous racist idea.
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Black women with college education make the same or less as a White woman with a high school degree.
    • The following is an issue of concern that needs to be fixed: Black women have to earn an advanced degree to earn as much as a white woman with only a bachelor's degree. 
    • The United States is a racist nation because its policymakers and policies have been racist from the beginning.
    • Racism has always been terminal and curable. Racism has always been recognizable and mortal. 
    • [Check this if you don't disagree with any of the above]
  2. 2. Kendi lists 11 things that should be done to make America more anti-racist. Check those that you DISAGREE with:

    • Admit racial inequity is a problem of bad policy, not bad people. 
    • Identify racial inequity in all its intersections and manifestations. 
    • Investigate and uncover the racist policies causing racial inequity. 
    • Invent or find anti-racist policy that can eliminate racial inequity. 
    • Figure out who or what group has the power to institute anti-racist policy
    • Disseminate and educate about the uncovered racist policy and anti-racist policy correctives
    • Work with sympathetic anti-racist policymakers to institute anti-racist policy
    • Deploy anti-racist power to compel or drive from power the unsympathetic racist policymakers in order to institute the anti-racist policy. 
    • Monitor closely to ensure the anti-racist policy reduces and eliminates racial inequity.
    • When policies fail, do not blame the people. Start over and seek out new and more affective anti-racist treatments until they work. 
    • Monitor closely to prevent new racist policies from being instituted. 
    • [Check this if you don't disagree with any of the above]
  3. 3. After considering the above, Ibram X. Kendi would likely consider me......

    • Anti-racist, because I actively support anti-racist policy and anti-racist ideas.
    • Racist, because even if I am not actively supporting racist policies and ideas, I am indirectly sustaining these ideas through my inaction in supporting anti-racist policies and anti-racist ideas.
    • I disagree with Kendi that being neutral on race is racist and that being just "not racist" is racist. Thus, not being "anti-racist" does not mean one is racist.
  4. 4. Will the United States ever have approximate equality/equity among different races, ethnicities, gender, etc.?

    • Yes, but it will take a lot of effort and determination by federal, state, local governments and the citizens and companies therein.
    • No, our country was founded on an inequality/inequity that will be impossible to shake.
    • I don't know/don't have a hunch
      0
  5. 5. Is capitalism and/or Socialism helping or harming the quest for racial inquity

    • Capitalism is absolutely anti-racist; Socialism is absolutely racist
      0
    • Capitalism is more anti-racist than Socialism
    • Socialism would be more anti-racist than Capitalism
    • Socialism is absolutely anti-racist; Capitalism is absolutely racist
      0
    • It is unclear to me if any of these systems have any impact on racial inequity or not.


Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Actinguy said:

One of these sentences has 59 words.
 

It is immediately followed by a sentence that has 119 words.

I can’t read this.

Lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Ok boomer. This is just so patently false and myopic that that's all you get in response. The fact that you like civil rights protesters to children tells me all I need to know about your views on rac

This might be the most racist thing ever posted on this former not posted by the user Koneke.  Blacks as a whole commit fewer felonies than whites. Blacks are disproportionately incarcerated long

Or... hear me out... we as conservatives begin to make our case. America is a nation infected by racism. This cannot be denied. Our government uses its authority to deprive constitutional liberti

Posted Images

20 hours ago, Actinguy said:

One of these sentences has 59 words.
 

It is immediately followed by a sentence that has 119 words.

I can’t read this.

The Latin language, in the earliest Latin script used in the Roman Kingdom, Roman Republic, and Roman Empire of Late Antiquity and into West Roman Empire of the Dark Ages, and the Late Antiquity, Dark Ages and early Medieval Roman Catholic Church, had all capital letters and no punctuation. You would have been utterly lost... :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Patine said:

The Latin language, in the earliest Latin script used in the Roman Kingdom, Roman Republic, and Roman Empire of Late Antiquity and into West Roman Empire of the Dark Ages, and the Late Antiquity, Dark Ages and early Medieval Roman Catholic Church, had all capital letters and no punctuation. You would have been utterly lost... :P

The dead languages are dead for a reason.    

;c)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Actinguy said:

The dead languages are dead for a reason.    

;c)

English is a HORRIBLE candidate for a global lingua franca, though. Most linguists agree - including most of those whose mother tongue is English...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

English is a HORRIBLE candidate for a global lingua franca, though. Most linguists agree - including most of those whose mother tongue is English...

Ok, but you’ll have to convince the rest of the world, because they already decided.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Actinguy said:

Ok, but you’ll have to convince the rest of the world, because they already decided.  

I'm not aware of a unanimous consensus such as you seem to claim. There's a lot of people in the world who are not at all board with the idea, and have other proposals. And it's interesting that I quoted an academic opinion by a majority of linguists, but you phrased it as though it were just me, alone, with a crazy, fringe idea only I held. In fact, you like to phrase all of my statements, ideas, and criticisms you don't like, don't agree with, don't feel comfortable with, or feel offended by, in those terms as a subtle, but condescending and arrogant attempt to belittle and ridicule my points of view in a way I'm sure you wouldn't tolerate most doing to yours. I can see right through that tactic, and you would do best to quit it - it kills any credulity and legitimacy your counterpoints or differing views have, and hurts their presentation - it doesn't REALLY enhance them. It's also something Trump would do if he were capable of subtlety - but it's right up his alley, otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Patine said:

I'm not aware of a unanimous consensus such as you seem to claim. There's a lot of people in the world who are not at all board with the idea, and have other proposals. And it's interesting that I quoted an academic opinion by a majority of linguists, but you phrased it as though it were just me, alone, with a crazy, fringe idea only I held. In fact, you like to phrase all of my statements, ideas, and criticisms you don't like, don't agree with, don't feel comfortable with, or feel offended by, in those terms as a subtle, but condescending and arrogant attempt to belittle and ridicule my points of view in a way I'm sure you wouldn't tolerate most doing to yours. I can see right through that tactic, and you would do best to quit it - it kills any credulity and legitimacy your counterpoints or differing views have, and hurts their presentation - it doesn't REALLY enhance them. It's also something Trump would do if he were capable of subtlety - but it's right up his alley, otherwise.

I’ve been to 17 countries.  I’ve never struggled to communicate.  English is the closest thing to a global language that we have.  It’s the language of international trade, and money talks.

Im not saying this is a good thing or a bad thing, I’m just saying that it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Actinguy said:

I’ve been to 17 countries.  I’ve never struggled to communicate.  English is the closest thing to a global language that we have.  It’s the language of international trade, and money talks.

Im not saying this is a good thing or a bad thing, I’m just saying that it is.

I'm also saying there are 210 countries (and about 20 de facto, unrecognized countries) and over 50 non-integral, autonomous entities associated with sovereign nations you haven't been to. My brother, who worked for Weatherford International Oil Tools Repair, has been to a slighter higher number of countries, and he needed a full-time interpreter when in Libya, Gabon, and Algeria, for instance. North Korea and Laos have an ABSOLTUELY tiny number of English speakers, and there are powerful advocacy groups who'd like to see a language like Spanish, French, Russian, Chinese, or Arabic, or even a constructed like Esperanto, fill that role, instead. Plus, I also STILL object to you stating an opinion on English' flaws for the role by quality of linguistic traits, not the real application of the matter, which I quoted from a majority of linguists, as though it were MY OWN fringe and wacko opinion which I only I had. As I stated in the post you quoted, you have used this tactic before to subtly belittle and ridicule things I say, and I see through it, and it hurts your OWN credible to resort to such tactics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2020 at 11:56 AM, vcczar said:

purged 58,000 voted by alleged felons. Blacks were 11% of Florida's registered voters but 44% of those on the purged list

Maybe blacks should commit fewer felonies.

On 7/13/2020 at 11:56 AM, vcczar said:

Blacks were 10x more likely to have their ballot rejected

An isolated statistic which out of context tells us nothing. Why were they more likely to have their vote rejected? I need much more information than this.

 

On 7/12/2020 at 8:08 PM, SilentLiberty said:

 

On 7/13/2020 at 11:56 AM, vcczar said:

Ohio falsely told former prisoners that they could not vote.

Bad on them, but what does that have to do with blacks?

On 7/13/2020 at 11:56 AM, vcczar said:

Black Ohio voters waited 52 minutes to vote, while Whites waited 18 minutes to vote when at the polls.

What, were there different lines segregated by race? Surely, there must have been SOME whites in the 52 minute line and SOME blacks in the 18 minute line. A truly institutionalized racism would have had the lines LITERALLY segregated.

 

Again you have shown me nothing to prove that any of this is by design to disenfranchise black voters. I'm sure there were white people in the 52 minute line and blacks in the 18 minute line. You're telling me that ALL blacks waited 52 minutes and ALL whites waited 18? Was there a law that says blacks have to wait longer? That's what systemic means. You have to show me that there is racist intent ingrained into a major institution or system, not isolated incidents, not coincidences, and disparate effects prove zilch. Would a country infected with racism elect and overwhelmingly re-elect a black president? Come on, really?

Until you show me a law that has disparate impact on minority races as it's sole or primary STATED INTENT, spelt out, you're falling on deaf ears here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2020 at 8:08 PM, SilentLiberty said:

Hey man, you know what, sure. I've typed up a couple different responses, but I figure I'll just bite my tongue and play along. That being said an FYI, I didn't like the poll because it's outrageously baity and serves no purpose but to divide. And of course when people didn't respond the way you wanted, but maybe believed they would, you jumped at the chance to call them racist and further the divide. Rather than try and show them the warm embrace of socialism, youjust played a "gotcha!"...

Agreed. Take Question #4 for example: ""Will the United States ever have approximate equality/equity among different races, ethnicities, gender, etc.?"

The truth is we ALREADY have EXACT equality among all those groups. Equity? No. Government cannot grant equity and equality. The only way to force equal outcomes is to create unequal opportunities. But my primary point here is the fact that this wasn't even an OPTION in the poll, that the thought that we have racial equality isn't even worthy of an option, tells me that this is slanted to get an expected result, or that we're somehow expected to justify our "anti-racism" every time a racial incident happens in this country. I'm sick and tired of it and I won't stoop to that. If someone think someone else is a racist, they better GOD DAMN WELL prove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎12‎/‎2020 at 5:10 PM, Patine said:

Are you aware of the difference, especially regarding societies and the application of laws, judiciary action, and governance, of the terms "de jure," and "de facto?"

@servo75 You still haven't answered this question, above, which is just as relevant to this post:

4 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Agreed. Take Question #4 for example: ""Will the United States ever have approximate equality/equity among different races, ethnicities, gender, etc.?"

The truth is we ALREADY have EXACT equality among all those groups. Equity? No. Government cannot grant equity and equality. The only way to force equal outcomes is to create unequal opportunities. But my primary point here is the fact that this wasn't even an OPTION in the poll, that the thought that we have racial equality isn't even worthy of an option, tells me that this is slanted to get an expected result, or that we're somehow expected to justify our "anti-racism" every time a racial incident happens in this country. I'm sick and tired of it and I won't stoop to that. If someone think someone else is a racist, they better GOD DAMN WELL prove it.

as to the one it was in direct response to in the first place on Page One of this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2020 at 8:47 PM, Reagan04 said:

Or... hear me out... we as conservatives begin to make our case.

America is a nation infected by racism. This cannot be denied. Our government uses its authority to deprive constitutional liberties to people of color systematically. I could give you a list of every section of the constitution and how it's been perverted to deny liberty to underserved communities of color. Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem!

So how about we as Republicans stop whining about how black people are taking a stand against the systematic murder and oppression of their people and start recognizing it is the same federal government we all dislike and want to shrink that is the root of systemic racism! 

Republicans and conservatives need to realize that our ideology isn't just for white people and that people of color face serious adversity and systematic discrimination in our nation. It all boils down to expanded government power. The remedies to all of our woes can be found in the Constitution. And I'd be happy to discuss how we can dismantle systemic racism through conservative/libertarian thinking and principles and actually use *gasp* Capitalism as a tool to help people of color get ahead. 

White people are privileged in this country. Full Stop. People of Color are discriminated against in this country. Full Stop. It's time that we as conservatives get with the train before it leaves the station and we're relegated to a hopelessly irrelevant position of the past.

I partially agree with you in that the government causes more problems than it solves. Even initiatives that were supposed to help, like the so-called "Great Society" did much more harm than good. What George W. Bush called the soft bigotry of low expectations is a very real thing. But if you're going to claim that there's systemic racism, or more "systematic murder and oppression"... MURDER?? I assume you don't mean in 1850 or 1955, but in 2020? I frankly need to see evidence of that, and anything short of a law starting with "Henceforth all black Americans shall..." will not suffice. I continue to make the case that you need to do much more than point out disparate impacts or isolated cases. And the word "systemic" or "institutional." I don't deny there's racism in this country. And no amount of "sensitivity training" or "cultural non-bias" whatever is going to change that. But systemic means system-wide and if you're going to state that we are "infected" with it, it should be widely obvious, not only in effect, but in intent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2020 at 11:46 PM, servo75 said:

If I'm wrong about that statement, there's a very easy way to prove me wrong. All you have to do is show me an official law or policy in any major United States jurisdiction (i.e. an "institution") that has a disproportionate effect of people based on their race, not as some side effect stemming from cultural differences, but as it's sole and intended purpose. For example, a law saying that blacks must sit at the back of city buses. When you say "systemic" you're talking about system-wide, ingrained into our very society, and you said yourself that racism in the modern U.S. is overblown. When you say "institutional" show me the institution. Sorry if you feel I'm talking in absolutes - I only do that when discussing facts. I've been extra careful, in recent posts, that if something is my opinion, and I'm not sure, that I explicitly state so. But when I have the facts on my side, I will speak in more absolute terms. If I say, "objects on Earth, when dropped, always fall," yes that's talking in absolutes. Because gravity is a fact. So are the 13th-15th Amendments, the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. So if I'm wrong, show me a law that violates one of those laws, one with disparate effect as it's stated intended purpose and I'll take it back.

Lol you mean laws like the 1994 Crime Bill which was literally enacted after the legislators were made well-aware that it would disproportionally affect african-americans? Of course no laws exist that discriminate solely based on race, that ended in the 1960s with the Civil Rights act but theres still INSTITUTIONAL racism and SYSTEMATIC racism, black people being prosecuted for crimes that white people easily get away with, laws that the legislators KNOW will take black people off the streets instead of rehabilitating their community that are still pushed through, black people being 3.7 more likely to be arrested on possession charges despite white people taking drugs at the same rate if not more likely, black drivers being more likely to be stopped and then searched despite a less contraband find rate, blacks and hispanics are more likely to be denied bond than whites, employers are less likely to call back black people with criminal records than white people with criminal records. There's more than this, the UN report of racial disparities in US policing and the justice system covered it all.

And it isn't cultural differences, it is institutional and it is systematic that black people still live in those communities, the federal government allowed states to enact Jim Crow and create "ghettos" and then when the 1968 Civil Rights Act was passed and segregation was no longer allowed, the states threw a tantrum and said "okay but im still not helping them" so now we are in a situation created by white men where black people are born with a disadvantage in these neighborhoods and it is still enforced by white men. In 1996, everyone knew that black people were facing issues in their communities with crime, it was the height of gang crime in the US, so what does the government do? Drive all those ex-convicts back to the gangs with the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 which made it impossible for them to get any education benefits, federal welfare benefits, food stamps, anything thing to do with cash assistance. You know what happens when you deny a way to survive to an ex-convict? You do the math.

The truth is too, these parties like when black people and hispanics with records are disenfranchised and have felony records. They can't vote. That's exactly what they want, so why change it? Continue to ignore that things like this happen as much as you want, maybe if you spent a day as a black person, a hispanic person or a native american person and were stopped for a pair of dice hanging in your car, you'd see how ridiculous it is. I don't know how you can't fathom how this issue exists in the US after Philando Castile was murdered after declaring the legal firearm he was carrying and was fully following the officers orders and the officer still got off cause of qualified immunity. Give me a break.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, servo75 said:

I partially agree with you in that the government causes more problems than it solves. Even initiatives that were supposed to help, like the so-called "Great Society" did much more harm than good. What George W. Bush called the soft bigotry of low expectations is a very real thing. But if you're going to claim that there's systemic racism, or more "systematic murder and oppression"... MURDER?? I assume you don't mean in 1850 or 1955, but in 2020? I frankly need to see evidence of that, and anything short of a law starting with "Henceforth all black Americans shall..." will not suffice. I continue to make the case that you need to do much more than point out disparate impacts or isolated cases. And the word "systemic" or "institutional." I don't deny there's racism in this country. And no amount of "sensitivity training" or "cultural non-bias" whatever is going to change that. But systemic means system-wide and if you're going to state that we are "infected" with it, it should be widely obvious, not only in effect, but in intent.

Yes, I mean systemic murder. I mean the systemic criminalization of black people. The Great Society was not meant to do good, it was meant to and has effectively furthered the economic oppression and de facto segregation of black people. 

You of all people should understand the whirlwind of government forces meant to keep down black people in this country. I say this not because all of your comments on this post reek of white privilege but for a self-proclaimed libertarian it's our duty to recognize that the journey to liberty has always been a lot more treacherous for people of color than for white people.

You ask us to prove de jure institutional racism, this has not been constitutional since 1867 or legal in most parts of the country since 1964, and yet it still exists. You should be quick to understand that just because the Constitution or a Law *says* one thing that that doesn't necessarily follow. You strike me as a lover of the Constitution. I'm sure you could name a litany of non-racial ways our government violates the contstraints of the Constitution every day. So too could I. I can also name a litany of ways it does that disparately impacts people of color. This is not some unfortunate coincidence, it is the legacy and heir of slavery and segregation: systemic racism.

We know from confessions from these lawmakers (Namely LBJ and Nixon) that their intent was to transition us from Jim Crow to modern day systemic racism. This is entirely similar to the way lawmakers in the Post-Reconstruction South made the transition from slavery to sharecropping and then in the dawn of the 20th century made the transition to segregation. We've slowly gotten better and yet the roots run deep and the policies of government oppression aimed at people of color abound.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Yes, I mean systemic murder. I mean the systemic criminalization of black people. The Great Society was not meant to do good, it was meant to and has effectively furthered the economic oppression and de facto segregation of black people. 

You of all people should understand the whirlwind of government forces meant to keep down black people in this country. I say this not because all of your comments on this post reek of white privilege but for a self-proclaimed libertarian it's our duty to recognize that the journey to liberty has always been a lot more treacherous for people of color than for white people.

You ask us to prove de jure institutional racism, this has not been constitutional since 1867 or legal in most parts of the country since 1964, and yet it still exists. You should be quick to understand that just because the Constitution or a Law *says* one thing that that doesn't necessarily follow. You strike me as a lover of the Constitution. I'm sure you could name a litany of non-racial ways our government violates the contstraints of the Constitution every day. So too could I. I can also name a litany of ways it does that disparately impacts people of color. This is not some unfortunate coincidence, it is the legacy and heir of slavery and segregation: systemic racism.

We know from confessions from these lawmakers (Namely LBJ and Nixon) that their intent was to transition us from Jim Crow to modern day systemic racism. This is entirely similar to the way lawmakers in the Post-Reconstruction South made the transition from slavery to sharecropping and then in the dawn of the 20th century made the transition to segregation. We've slowly gotten better and yet the roots run deep and the policies of government oppression aimed at people of color abound.

As soon as LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968 that's when he clapped his hands and said "Okay that's all I'm gonna do for them negros." He was a notoriously racist president which people refuse to remember. The Great Society helped illiterate people in rural Texas more than it did black people in urban centers, though I will admit it did help a lot of Mexican-Americans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wolves said:

Lol you mean laws like the 1994 Crime Bill which was literally enacted after the legislators were made well-aware that it would disproportionally affect african-americans? Of course no laws exist that discriminate solely based on race, that ended in the 1960s with the Civil Rights act but theres still INSTITUTIONAL racism and SYSTEMATIC racism, black people being prosecuted for crimes that white people easily get away with, laws that the legislators KNOW will take black people off the streets instead of rehabilitating their community that are still pushed through, black people being 3.7 more likely to be arrested on possession charges despite white people taking drugs at the same rate if not more likely, black drivers being more likely to be stopped and then searched despite a less contraband find rate, blacks and hispanics are more likely to be denied bond than whites, employers are less likely to call back black people with criminal records than white people with criminal records. There's more than this, the UN report of racial disparities in US policing and the justice system covered it all.

And it isn't cultural differences, it is institutional and it is systematic that black people still live in those communities, the federal government allowed states to enact Jim Crow and create "ghettos" and then when the 1968 Civil Rights Act was passed and segregation was no longer allowed, the states threw a tantrum and said "okay but im still not helping them" so now we are in a situation created by white men where black people are born with a disadvantage in these neighborhoods and it is still enforced by white men. In 1996, everyone knew that black people were facing issues in their communities with crime, it was the height of gang crime in the US, so what does the government do? Drive all those ex-convicts back to the gangs with the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 which made it impossible for them to get any education benefits, federal welfare benefits, food stamps, anything thing to do with cash assistance. You know what happens when you deny a way to survive to an ex-convict? You do the math.

The truth is too, these parties like when black people and hispanics with records are disenfranchised and have felony records. They can't vote. That's exactly what they want, so why change it? Continue to ignore that things like this happen as much as you want, maybe if you spent a day as a black person, a hispanic person or a native american person and were stopped for a pair of dice hanging in your car, you'd see how ridiculous it is. I don't know how you can't fathom how this issue exists in the US after Philando Castile was murdered after declaring the legal firearm he was carrying and was fully following the officers orders and the officer still got off cause of qualified immunity. Give me a break.

 

6 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Yes, I mean systemic murder. I mean the systemic criminalization of black people. The Great Society was not meant to do good, it was meant to and has effectively furthered the economic oppression and de facto segregation of black people. 

You of all people should understand the whirlwind of government forces meant to keep down black people in this country. I say this not because all of your comments on this post reek of white privilege but for a self-proclaimed libertarian it's our duty to recognize that the journey to liberty has always been a lot more treacherous for people of color than for white people.

You ask us to prove de jure institutional racism, this has not been constitutional since 1867 or legal in most parts of the country since 1964, and yet it still exists. You should be quick to understand that just because the Constitution or a Law *says* one thing that that doesn't necessarily follow. You strike me as a lover of the Constitution. I'm sure you could name a litany of non-racial ways our government violates the contstraints of the Constitution every day. So too could I. I can also name a litany of ways it does that disparately impacts people of color. This is not some unfortunate coincidence, it is the legacy and heir of slavery and segregation: systemic racism.

We know from confessions from these lawmakers (Namely LBJ and Nixon) that their intent was to transition us from Jim Crow to modern day systemic racism. This is entirely similar to the way lawmakers in the Post-Reconstruction South made the transition from slavery to sharecropping and then in the dawn of the 20th century made the transition to segregation. We've slowly gotten better and yet the roots run deep and the policies of government oppression aimed at people of color abound.

@servo75refuses to answer this question, which I've posed to him twice in this thread, and he's utterly ignored:

On ‎7‎/‎12‎/‎2020 at 5:10 PM, Patine said:

Are you aware of the difference, especially regarding societies and the application of laws, judiciary action, and governance, of the terms "de jure," and "de facto?"

It's quite pivotal to your two's points, and a few others posting on this thread, too - but he seems to pretend this question, asked twice, doesn't exist, or is irrelevant it's not to dignified with a response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also on the topic of tearing down statues and renaming US Army bases, who cares about confederate generals, tear them down, if you care about the architectural integrity, throw it in a musuem. On US Army bases, what is the issue with renaming bases named after traitor loser generals into ones named after actual American heroes, medal of honor recipients or people who furthered the country you live in instead of tried to hold it back, would you love it if Westpoint was still called Fort Benedict Arnold?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, servo75 said:

Maybe blacks should commit fewer felonies.

An isolated statistic which out of context tells us nothing. Why were they more likely to have their vote rejected? I need much more information than this.

 

Bad on them, but what does that have to do with blacks?

What, were there different lines segregated by race? Surely, there must have been SOME whites in the 52 minute line and SOME blacks in the 18 minute line. A truly institutionalized racism would have had the lines LITERALLY segregated.

 

Again you have shown me nothing to prove that any of this is by design to disenfranchise black voters. I'm sure there were white people in the 52 minute line and blacks in the 18 minute line. You're telling me that ALL blacks waited 52 minutes and ALL whites waited 18? Was there a law that says blacks have to wait longer? That's what systemic means. You have to show me that there is racist intent ingrained into a major institution or system, not isolated incidents, not coincidences, and disparate effects prove zilch. Would a country infected with racism elect and overwhelmingly re-elect a black president? Come on, really?

Until you show me a law that has disparate impact on minority races as it's sole or primary STATED INTENT, spelt out, you're falling on deaf ears here.

This might be the most racist thing ever posted on this former not posted by the user Koneke. 

Blacks as a whole commit fewer felonies than whites. Blacks are disproportionately incarcerated longer than whites. 

In regards to the long lines, they likely gained this number by comparing polling stations that were 95% white and polling stations that were likely 95% black because of the neighborhoods.

a law doesn’t have to be specifically crafted to be racist to be a racist policy. A racist policy is any policy that creates racial inequity, even if it was unintended or if the racist impact was simply ignored.

You aren’t the judge on what is racist or what creates inequity. Those that have the platform to say such things are those affected by racist policies and racist ideas.

Please, stop being part of the problem. Show some bleeping consideration and respect for your black fellow citizens. 

In related news, I want to give special notice to @Reagan04, who I think has an empathetic and constructive Libertarian Conservatism that is certainly adaptable to the 21st century.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2020 at 8:41 PM, Reagan04 said:

yikes...

Yikes? BLM is like two year olds throwing a tantrum in a store. If you keep coddling them and giving toys to get them to be quiet, it becomes learned behavior when they're adults and don't get their way, all they have to do is set some fires and loot some stores and... "instant justice" (in some way that I haven't been able to figure out). This has been the result of over-coddling of this millenial and gen-Z generations. They're not used to being told "no." So if you're white and you keep "standing with a terrorist group that has nothing at all to do with black lives" you are enabling their behavior. I do not doubt for one moment your good intent, but it's misplaced. I genuinely think you think you're helping race relations... but the truth is you're not. Even worse are all these "woke" businesses" who have to fall over themselves to give "solidarity" statements, add BLM to their logos, and fold like a lawn chair, bowing before this mob that wants everything BUT equality. And for what? Is this the new normal? Every isolated race incident requires an ENTIRE race to keep re-affirming their non-racism? That's why this question pissed me off so much. I'm not racist. I never have been. My most distant ancestors immigrated here during the 1890s, three decades after slavery ended. I had NOTHING to do with any oppression and I'll be damned if I'm going to be made to feel guilty about who I am, and all those cowards kneeling and washing feet and telling us to "check their privilege" are ENABLING this nonsense. The racial outrage industry smells blood in the water and they will NEVER be satisfied. They are implacable. They want nothing less than the destruction of our history, our identity as a nation, our Constitution and everything else that's made us great. And especially for conservatives to kowtow to this nonsense, especially when WE are the party that FREED the slaves and PASSED the Civil Rights acts above the protests and filibusters of the Democrats, well I'm just flummoxed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Yikes? BLM is like two year olds throwing a tantrum in a store. If you keep coddling them and giving toys to get them to be quiet, it becomes learned behavior when they're adults and don't get their way, all they have to do is set some fires and loot some stores and... "instant justice" (in some way that I haven't been able to figure out). This has been the result of over-coddling of this millenial and gen-Z generations. They're not used to being told "no."

Ok boomer. This is just so patently false and myopic that that's all you get in response. The fact that you like civil rights protesters to children tells me all I need to know about your views on race relations. Something tells me you're no stranger to the word "uppity" either.

5 minutes ago, servo75 said:

So if you're white and you keep "standing with a terrorist group that has nothing at all to do with black lives" you are enabling their behavior.

The greater Black Lives Matter movement is not terrorist, they are an expression of patriotism. Black Lives Matter as a statement is a way of getting our nation to finally extend equal protection under the law entirely.

11 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Even worse are all these "woke" businesses" who have to fall over themselves to give "solidarity" statements, add BLM to their logos, and fold like a lawn chair, bowing before this mob that wants everything BUT equality. And for what? Is this the new normal?

Why should you care? Let private businesses pander, it's their right. It's just Fox News pundits trying to get people mad about non-issues. This is the culture wars nonsense that hysterical right wing media stirs up to make people angry. Think critically and don't fall for it.

13 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Every isolated race incident requires an ENTIRE race to keep re-affirming their non-racism?

Except it's not isolated and you haven't engaged with all the evidence that it's not. You think racism is just some racist gas station owner in Mississippi who is 85 and dying and won't sell gas to black people and that's about it in this country. When in reality the core of our criminal justice system and our predatory welfare state is built around a racist model of government. It's built to attack people of color. These are the economic and social means of oppression and systemic racism I reference when I talk about the issues of big government that can be solved by actually following the Constitution.

14 minutes ago, servo75 said:

I'm not racist. I never have been. My most distant ancestors immigrated here during the 1890s, three decades after slavery ended. I had NOTHING to do with any oppression and I'll be damned if I'm going to be made to feel guilty about who I am, and all those cowards kneeling and washing feet and telling us to "check their privilege" are ENABLING this nonsense.

I totally and completely understand and sympathize with your confusion and your anger. I once felt this way too. As a white person, it's easy to attempt to wash our hands of the very real and active roots of oppression in this country. But we absolutely do have privilege. We shouldn't feel guilty about being white. No one worth their salt is saying that. It's just our job to support policies and make decisions that actively oppose racism in society. In short, be a decent person and audit your own opinions. You've made some very racially insensitive remarks above and I think you'd do well to dig deeper into historical contexts and the current patterns of oppression and policies by which systemic racism thrives. I've already explained a few of the ways that the government oppresses people of color as have others. It's difficult to really illustrate the interconnecting web we're dealing with in text. But in short, through the Great Society and other programs, the government has systematically targeted and dismantled the black family and as a result black economic prosperity. De Facto segregation is alive and well in our urban areas and economic divides are as steep as ever because of the generational wealth gap created by the history of oppressive government policies. This all began during the 1960s as the economic prosperity of black communities was dismantled. Then came along the 1970s with the War on Drugs and Mass Incarceration. This is what we mean when we talk about criminalizing people of color. The government essentially criminalized its political opposition, extending the oppression. Then up to the 1990s when we get the Crime Bill that really puts the cherry on top of he modern systemic racism found in America. It pervades all areas of public policy and it violates the Constitution in all its forms. Its our jobs as conservatives to open our eyes to this fact and proselytize liberty to those who need to most: people of color.

20 minutes ago, servo75 said:

The racial outrage industry smells blood in the water and they will NEVER be satisfied. They are implacable. They want nothing less than the destruction of our history, our identity as a nation, our Constitution and everything else that's made us great.

My man, they just want equality. They want to be exercise their 2nd amendment right without a trigger happy cop blowing them away. They want to be able to exercise their first amendment right and protest in the capital of the oldest and strongest republic in the world without being teargassed. They want to be able to exercise their 4th amendment right to sleep in their home peacefully without a police officer knocking the door down in the middle of the night and raining hellfire into their apartment. They want to exercise their 5th amendment right to a due process and equalize the courtroom. They want to exericse their 6th amendment right to a fair trial and a 7th amendment right to a jury that isn't voir dired until it's about as white as Mitt Romney in a blizzard. They want an 8th amendment that protects them from predatory bail policies and ultimately they want a 14th amendment that does what it says and finally guarantees that when a black life is destroyed by the system the system will be held equally to account as when a white life is taken. 

They aren't implacable, they want the same thing they've wanted since 1619: liberty and equality.

They don't want to destroy our Constitution: they want it to apply to them. They don't want to destroy our history: they want to be recognized for their monumental role in shaping it. They don't want to destroy our national identity: they want to be fairly represented for the massive part of it they play.

They don't want to destroy what makes us great, they want access to what makes us great.

26 minutes ago, servo75 said:

And especially for conservatives to kowtow to this nonsense, especially when WE are the party that FREED the slaves and PASSED the Civil Rights acts above the protests and filibusters of the Democrats, well I'm just flummoxed.

You're right, we did free the slaves and we did pass the Civil Rights Act. Now let's end the War on Drugs, end the predatory Welfare State, end Racialized Policing, engender economic growth in black communities, tear down barriers to access, cut the size of the tyrannical government oppressing people of color, making it easier to immigrate, stop mass incarceration, make local government a modern invention and make courtrooms and police departments look like their communities, expanding voting rights, and actually live up to our name as Republicans and expand the purview of the Republic to everyone that doesn't look like us too by finally and thoroughly extending the Constitution to all those whose skin color is more than off-beige.

We can't just rest on our laurels because there is a lot of work left in the name of liberty and equality left to be done and I'll be damned if conservatives aren't leading that charge in this country.

Right now we're the party of breaking every single line of the Constitution in the name of oppressing people of color (Trump managed to pull out a way to violate the 3rd amendment! 3rd! I think they might be marking off a check list of abuses of power used to empower systemic racism and tyranny!)

Let's get our act together and get back to what we're good at: liberty.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Patine said:

I'm also saying there are 210 countries (and about 20 de facto, unrecognized countries) and over 50 non-integral, autonomous entities associated with sovereign nations you haven't been to. My brother, who worked for Weatherford International Oil Tools Repair, has been to a slighter higher number of countries, and he needed a full-time interpreter when in Libya, Gabon, and Algeria, for instance. North Korea and Laos have an ABSOLTUELY tiny number of English speakers, and there are powerful advocacy groups who'd like to see a language like Spanish, French, Russian, Chinese, or Arabic, or even a constructed like Esperanto, fill that role, instead. Plus, I also STILL object to you stating an opinion on English' flaws for the role by quality of linguistic traits, not the real application of the matter, which I quoted from a majority of linguists, as though it were MY OWN fringe and wacko opinion which I only I had. As I stated in the post you quoted, you have used this tactic before to subtly belittle and ridicule things I say, and I see through it, and it hurts your OWN credible to resort to such tactics.

You took an extremist position that the language that is the closest thing to a global language that we have is actually the worst language for the job.

My response was the forum equivalent of an eye roll because that was your defense to the fact that you don’t have even an elementary school level  understanding of how to use basic punctuation despite presumably being a native speaker of the language.

This makes your thoughts come across as unhinged, rather than carefully considered and presented.  Take the time to organize your thoughts in your mind and then onto paper/this forum, and you would find that you’re taken a little more seriously.

We have forum users here who speak English as a second or even third language, and they still come across much more coherently than you do.

Why?

They learned how to think about their own ideas and present them in a way that would make others interested in thinking about those ideas as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, servo75 said:

Maybe blacks should commit fewer felonies.

Maybe!  
 

But if it’s true that black people commit more felonies, then shouldn’t we wonder why?  Their DNA is nearly identical to the DNA of people who are not black, so there doesn’t seem to be a “nature” reason.  It must then be “nurture”, which is to say environmental.  What in their environment would cause such a thing?  How do we help to fix those environmental causes, or at least help expose them to other environments in which crime is a last resort?

 

But this is all based on the presumption that black people are committing more felonies in the first place.  I disagree.  
 

I say black people are not committing more felonies.  They are just getting CAUGHT and CONVICTED more frequently than white people are.


I make a great living now.  But there was a time when that was not the case.  I was homeless for six months, before I decided to join the military.  I had a job, but it paid way too little to make ends meet.  I slept in my car, and stole food from grocery stores.  I would also eat in restaurants and then run away without paying for the bill.

A crime that I was already more statistically likely to get away with because management and staff don’t look at me as a likely thief, in part because of my skin color.

Eventually, I was recognized nonetheless as a repeat offender and was caught trying to run from one of these bills.  I was turned over to police, who asked the restaurant manager if he wanted me criminally charged for my thefts.  I begged the manager and assured him I was a good person who had fallen on hard times, but that I had a plan to turn it all around and join the military (a plan that would be ruined if I had a criminal record).  
 

The manager decided not to press charges.  And thus I still had the opportunity to join the military and turn my life around, and now I’m a wealthy contributor to society.  I was given the chance to become a Dad, a homeowner, the founder of a charity, and a voter — all despite my crimes.

And frankly that’s only one example.  I could tell you dozens of more stories about crimes I committed (even before and after being homeless) that I got away with that would have been future-ending for some individuals with different skin colors.

It’s not that they commit more crimes.

It’s that they are more likely to be caught because they’re suspected due to their skin color, and because they are less likely to find mercy because of systemic racism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Actinguy said:

Maybe!  
 

But if it’s true that black people commit more felonies, then shouldn’t we wonder why?  Their DNA is nearly identical to the DNA of people who are not black, so there doesn’t seem to be a “nature” reason.  It must then be “nurture”, which is to say environmental.  What in their environment would cause such a thing?  How do we help to fix those environmental causes, or at least help expose them to other environments in which crime is a last resort?

 

But this is all based on the presumption that black people are committing more felonies in the first place.  I disagree.  
 

I say black people are not committing more felonies.  They are just getting CAUGHT and CONVICTED more frequently than white people are.


I make a great living now.  But there was a time when that was not the case.  I was homeless for six months, before I decided to join the military.  I had a job, but it paid way too little to make ends meet.  I slept in my car, and stole food from grocery stores.  I would also eat in restaurants and then run away without paying for the bill.

A crime that I was already more statistically likely to get away with because management and staff don’t look at me as a likely thief, in part because of my skin color.

Eventually, I was recognized nonetheless as a repeat offender and was caught trying to run from one of these bills.  I was turned over to police, who asked the restaurant manager if he wanted me criminally charged for my thefts.  I begged the manager and assured him I was a good person who had fallen on hard times, but that I had a plan to turn it all around and join the military (a plan that would be ruined if I had a criminal record).  
 

The manager decided not to press charges.  And thus I still had the opportunity to join the military and turn my life around, and now I’m a wealthy contributor to society.  I was given the chance to become a Dad, a homeowner, the founder of a charity, and a voter — all despite my crimes.

And frankly that’s only one example.  I could tell you dozens of more stories about crimes I committed (even before and after being homeless) that I got away with that would have been future-ending for some individuals with different skin colors.

It’s not that they commit more crimes.

It’s that they are more likely to be caught because they’re suspected due to their skin color, and because they are less likely to find mercy because of systemic racism.

They don't even commit more crimes, at least the ones they're usually thrown in prison for, black drug possession rate is equal to white possession rate, black people just get prosecuted more.

It's an unfair system and honestly if you can see stop-and-frisk was clearly a thing and you want to deny racism exists then you're just blinded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, servo75 said:

Yikes? BLM is like two year olds throwing a tantrum in a store. If you keep coddling them and giving toys to get them to be quiet, it becomes learned behavior when they're adults and don't get their way, all they have to do is set some fires and loot some stores and... "instant justice" (in some way that I haven't been able to figure out). This has been the result of over-coddling of this millenial and gen-Z generations.

I'm gonna be completely honest with you. Rioting is the wrong thing to do always but what reason are they given to stop? A month's worth of protesting and rioting led to reforms that people have been trying to enact democratically through voting and polite activism since the era of the Black Panthers in the 1960s. If protesting and rioting FINALLY ends qualified immunity, why stop? Maybe politicians should begin to listen to voters instead of assume their constituents automatically agree with them - they don't, you are just the only blue with a D next to his name on the ticket. These people are just demanding they be listened to.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...