Ferguson riots

[nowaysj]

@nowaysj

Your comments on the lack of Caucasians being murdered by police and subsequent media coverage has got me thinking. I don't think that it has any thing to do with a liberal bias or conservative bias in the media. Remember the media is ran by the ruling class of the U.S. Every move they make is calculated and has a reason. What appears in the media is what the ruling class wants us to see and react to, in other words, they want to mold our opinions in their favor.

The division of the proletariat is essential to the ruling classes power. If the police brutality against Caucasians was shown in the media, then white people will soon distrust police, just like many Black Americans do. With that we have a link. A common ground between the white proletariat and black proletariat becomes apparent. Unification can begin once people realize that State brutality isn't a "race issue", but instead, a class issue.

In the kindest way possible, yeah, no duh! Haha!

What's worse is they pick these cases that ARE justified so open minded observers see the black reaction as unfounded, unnecessary, and in line with everything else they see and expect from the black community. Basically the MSM says, "LOOT!" and these people are all too happy to oblige.

But I caution you in this: This is not simply to divide the people along racial lines. They never have just one objective with these things. More later...

[Phigure]

this thread is like the anus of the forum

[soronery]

time to implement the redeker plan

the tide is swelling even more after the garner verdict in nyc

[nobody]

this thread is like the anus of the forum

especially the part where you said black people can't be racist

[nowaysj]

this thread is like the anus of the forum

Stopped by your place the other day.

[nowaysj]

this thread is like the anus of the forum

especially the part where you said black people can't be racist

That's like those black kids that went running down the street screaming, "Kill white people!" and then hammered that white dude's head in. Not racist. Can't be racist. It isn't even a hate crime. Lol, it is being described as a "car jacking."

[Phigure]

Prejudice is an irrational feeling of dislike for a person or group of persons, usually based on stereotype. Virtually everyone feels some sort of prejudice, whether it's for an ethnic group, or for a religious group, or for a type of person like blondes or fat people or tall people. The important thing is they just don't like them -- in short, prejudice is a feeling, a belief. You can be prejudiced, but still be a fair person if you're careful not to act on your irrational dislike.

Discrimination takes place the moment a person acts on prejudice. This describes those moments when one individual decides not to give another individual a job because of, say, their race or their religious orientation. Or even because of their looks (there's a lot of hiring discrimination against "unattractive" women, for example). You can discriminate, individually, against any person or group, if you're in a position of power over the person you want to discriminate against. White people can discriminate against black people, and black people can discriminate against white people if, for example, one is the interviewer and the other is the person being interviewed.

Racism, however, describes patterns of discrimination that are institutionalized as "normal" throughout an entire culture. It's based on an ideological belief that one "race" is somehow better than another "race". It's not one person discriminating at this point, but a whole population operating in a social structure that actually makes it difficult for a person not to discriminate.

[mks]

Sources?

[nobody]

[Dystinkt]

really w/ the gun thing?

this is so tired


there is no rid-country-of-guns button or else itdve been pressed by now

I think the whole its my right to have a gun so i can shoot any motherfucker i want is pretty tired personally, and it really pisses me off. But the police have guns because everyone has guns, if everyone didnt have guns then the police wouldn't need guns to police the general populace. If a country as supposedly powerful as 'murica can police the world then why can't it manage something as simple as regulating access to firearms.

[Phigure]

@nowaysj

Your comments on the lack of Caucasians being murdered by police and subsequent media coverage has got me thinking. I don't think that it has any thing to do with a liberal bias or conservative bias in the media. Remember the media is ran by the ruling class of the U.S. Every move they make is calculated and has a reason. What appears in the media is what the ruling class wants us to see and react to, in other words, they want to mold our opinions in their favor.

there's a lack of coverage about caucasians because it's a much less significant problem for caucasians as opposed to blacks

http://www.propublica.org/article/deadl ... -and-white

Young black males in recent years were at a far greater risk of being shot dead by police than their white counterparts – 21 times greater, according to a ProPublica analysis of federally collected data on fatal police shootings.

The 1,217 deadly police shootings from 2010 to 2012 captured in the federal data show that blacks, age 15 to 19, were killed at a rate of 31.17 per million, while just 1.47 per million white males in that age range died at the hands of police.

there's also less outrage because, while white deaths are obviously just as tragic, unlike the much more frequent violence against blacks, they aren't due to the systemic oppression against them because of their race. violence against both whites and blacks of course has class undercurrents, but the lack of value for black life is clearly a much more significant factor if they're being killed 21 times as often per capita.

and while i completely agree that the media is basically run by the bourgeoisie, that sort of strong armed control isn't how they do it. like chomsky says, "the mass media of the United States are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions and self-censorship, and without significant overt coercion." totalitarianism over has changed its game over the decades, gone are the days of its reliance on hitler/stalin/etc style authoritarianism.

Unification can begin once people realize that State brutality isn't a "race issue", but instead, a class issue.

it's both, but the race dimension blacks experience in addition is clearly much more significant if they're dying 21 times as much. and ultimately racism is entirely a result of capitalism anyways

[nowaysj]

ProPublica calculated a statistical figure called a risk ratio by dividing the rate of black homicide victims by the rate of white victims. This ratio, commonly used in epidemiology, gives an estimate for how much more at risk black teenagers were to be killed by police officers.

That is how your source calculated how many black people were shot by police. Farcical. This number is bogus because there are far more black homicide victims because black people kill far more frequently. This has nothing to do with officer involved shootings.

The real number of people killed by the police every year is harder to determine than it should be. But the best real numbers from real reported cases where officer involved shooting is the cause of death listed on death certificates is 326 whites killed in 2013, as opposed to 123 for blacks. So in 2013, if someone was shot and killed by the police they were 2.6 times more likely to be white than black.

But before you have to change your chonies, if we adjust for rates relative to population, yes blacks are 2.2 times more likely to be shot and killed by police. But don't forget, as the ivory reflects in the clouds around you, other numbers, that are also based in fact, not farce, that suggest black suspects are likely to be more dangerous, like the cdc's numbers on youth violence for 2010 which show blacks murder at over 17 times the rate of their white counterparts, they are one thousand seven hundred and seventy five percent more likely to murder.

When you have a group of people that are so willing to disproportionately use deadly force, I wouldn't be surprised if officers perceived a greater threat when making arrests of black suspects. You can call it right or wrong, but I'm going to take your opinion with a grain of salt until you are the one making those arrests.

[soronery]

art imitating life

[magma]

ProPublica calculated a statistical figure called a risk ratio by dividing the rate of black homicide victims by the rate of white victims. This ratio, commonly used in epidemiology, gives an estimate for how much more at risk black teenagers were to be killed by police officers.

That is how your source calculated how many black people were shot by police. Farcical. This number is bogus because there are far more black homicide victims because black people kill far more frequently. This has nothing to do with officer involved shootings.

Why is calculating a ratio "farcical"? I've obviously missed your point here.

The real number of people killed by the police every year is harder to determine than it should be. But the best real numbers from real reported cases where officer involved shooting is the cause of death listed on death certificates is 326 whites killed in 2013, as opposed to 123 for blacks. So in 2013, if someone was shot and killed by the police they were 2.6 times more likely to be white than black.

Yet an American is 7 times more likely to be white that black; so white people are seeing about half the deaths they should if the playing field was even.

like the cdc's numbers on youth violence for 2010 which show blacks murder at over 17 times the rate of their white counterparts, they are one thousand seven hundred and seventy five percent more likely to murder.

When you have a group of people that are so willing to disproportionately use deadly force, I wouldn't be surprised if officers perceived a greater threat when making arrests of black suspects. You can call it right or wrong, but I'm going to take your opinion with a grain of salt until you are the one making those arrests.

Yes, but why is that? You need to understand the whys in order to actually change anything. Are you saying that Black people are genetically skewed towards violence or could it be that the experience of being Black in America is enough to push a greater number into violent crime? America's great obsession for the last few centuries has been picking out differences between races and it has systematically allowed those prejudices to not only affect its national character and conversation, but to build its cities, to form its neighbourhoods boundaries and to effectively 'rig the game' against poor blacks to a much greater degree than it has poor whites. Being poor is hard anywhere, but being a poor, Black person in America has a whole extra set of challenges to being a poor white person. A country that still has, however unofficially, the "white" neighbourhoods and "black" neighbourhoods that were put in place during segregation and never properly integrated still clearly has an enormous hangover of institutionalised racism to deal with. That hangover will produce violent crime, it will produce disillusioned generations, it will produce kids who've seen clearly demonstrated time and time again that they have no stake in society if it is left to fester as it has been for the last 50 years in urban America.

Unfortunately, as tempting as it is to shoot our bang-bang sticks at danger, at some point, society has to be the caring family, the village raising the kids, that it likes to think it is when a white girl goes missing in Montana. Kill another generation of corner kids and you'll only create another. If your cops aren't skilled, compassionate, intelligent, nuanced or man enough to grasp the concepts at play here and take the risks their badge implies they're willing to take, then you, like many countries (including mine) need serious reform... and not in the shape of more guns and less questions for Police.

[nowaysj]

You get up too late, Magma.

ProPublica calculated a statistical figure called a risk ratio by dividing the rate of black homicide victims by the rate of white victims. This ratio, commonly used in epidemiology, gives an estimate for how much more at risk black teenagers were to be killed by police officers.

That is how your source calculated how many black people were shot by police. Farcical. This number is bogus because there are far more black homicide victims because black people kill far more frequently. This has nothing to do with officer involved shootings.

Why is calculating a ratio "farcical"? I've obviously missed your point here.

You might get it if you explain to me how that study determined the rate at which police officers kill black people.

The real number of people killed by the police every year is harder to determine than it should be. But the best real numbers from real reported cases where officer involved shooting is the cause of death listed on death certificates is 326 whites killed in 2013, as opposed to 123 for blacks. So in 2013, if someone was shot and killed by the police they were 2.6 times more likely to be white than black.

Yet an American is 7 times more likely to be white that black; so white people are seeing about half the deaths they should if the playing field was even.

No they're seeing .45 times the deaths if the playing field was even, as I stated right here:

blacks are 2.2 times more likely to be shot and killed by police

Yes, but why is that?

Yes, obviously, why.

You need to understand the whys in order to actually change anything.

I do?

Are you saying that Black people are genetically skewed towards violence

I'm not saying that, but I will entertain the idea. Even the concept of "genetically" needs expansion to include epigenetics.

I will entertain any idea that has the potential to lead us out of this. But whether they are or not is not at issue. What is at issue is if a police officer legitimately perceives a heightened threat when confronting a black suspect. When a black man has committed some felonies and police officers go in for the arrest, that is the end of the line. That is get real time. We have people screaming in the streets, acting like fools because of the end of the line. The real issue starts much, much sooner, if you've left it to where Mike Brown is choking old people to get blunted, you've left it too long, that is a terminal situation, whether he is shot or locked up, it's over for Mike Brown.

or could it be that the experience of being Black in America is enough to push a greater number into violent crime?

It seems like the experience of being black everywhere may be enough to push a greater number into violent crime.

America's great obsession for the last few centuries has been picking out differences between races

America's great obsession, during the time that I've been here, that is 70's-whatever the fuck you call this decade, has been getting along. Families trying to stay afloat through turbulent economic times, through decaying physical and moral infrastructure.

A country that still has, however unofficially, the "white" neighbourhoods and "black" neighbourhoods that were put in place during segregation and never properly integrated still clearly has an enormous hangover of institutionalised racism to deal with.

No. There has been a dance. On a large scale, there have been race swaps between the urban interior, the urban exterior and now back into the interior. Many communities were built after segregation, which also, as a legal concept was a southern issue, though the north did have discriminatory covenants attached to land. Also don't think that it is just white people excluding blacks. Blacks make it very clear that whites are not welcome in their communities. In reflection, most of the racism I've actually, personally seen has been blacks discriminating against whites.

That hangover will produce violent crime, it will produce disillusioned generations, it will produce kids who've seen clearly demonstrated time and time again that they have no stake in society...

Of course you see this as a social/state issue, but I see this as a family issue. The true soil that a child grows in is his family, and when that family puts no worth in the child, the child lives as if his life is without worth. Again, Michael Brown is the example. I wholeheartedly believe that Michael Brown's mother and father killed him. They failed him utterly, it just took their failure 18 years to reach fruition at the end of Daren Wilson's pistol.

Unfortunately, as tempting as it is to shoot our bang-bang sticks at danger, at some point, society has to be the caring family, the village raising the kids, that it likes to think it is when a white girl goes missing in Montana.

No external input can have a greater impact on a child's life then their family. Teachers, social workers, foster homes, vocational trainers, police officers, all committed, pitching in to show caring and respect doesn't mean shit when nobody in your family cares for you. That kind of pain is powerful and will find expression. Don't think that we're just sitting here whiling away the arvo, we have all kinds of social programs to suture these kids, but it is meaningless against negligent parenting and toxic popular culture. I'm not even going to get started on the role the media and popular culture then plays in shaping self image for these kids, but it is the ol' one, two, ko combo.

Unless you'd like to just roundup these at risk kids and send them to reeducation camps, I don't see the kind society helping much.

If your cops aren't skilled, compassionate, intelligent, nuanced or man enough to grasp the concepts at play here and take the risks their badge implies they're willing to take, then you, like many countries (including mine) need serious reform... and not in the shape of more guns and less questions for Police.

Our police forces have been very forcibly changed over the last twenty years. Many of the good guys have been squeezed out. Police departments have literally fought for and won the constitutional right to discriminate against smart applicants. Israeli defense contractors have been training police forces across the country as we gear up for an apartheid state (and who better to train our future occupiers). Serious and plentiful military equipment has hit the streets all over America. I've seen one of these MRAP tanks rolling or parked in almost every city I've visited recently. Like I'm often want to say, this situation has much greater implications.

[butter_man]

really w/ the gun thing?

this is so tired


there is no rid-country-of-guns button or else itdve been pressed by now

I think the whole its my right to have a gun so i can shoot any motherfucker i want is pretty tired personally, and it really pisses me off. But the police have guns because everyone has guns, if everyone didnt have guns then the police wouldn't need guns to police the general populace. If a country as supposedly powerful as 'murica can police the world then why can't it manage something as simple as regulating access to firearms.

a sidenote to this. I read an article in my local paper yesterday after a firearms amnesty saying that north wales has a very high level of guns, legally owned and one of the lowest levels of guncrime. kinda paradoxical to the whole : usa gun ownership:death thing.
there has to be more factors than : the gun.
maybe more welsh people

[magma]

You need to understand the whys in order to actually change anything.

I do?

Well, you do if you don't want to keep repeating the same old mistakes; but in a country that's still obsessed with arguing over the wording of a 250 year old constitution, I can see how that might be an alien concept.

It seems like the experience of being black everywhere may be enough to push a greater number into violent crime.

Wow.

No. There has been a dance. On a large scale, there have been race swaps between the urban interior, the urban exterior and now back into the interior. Many communities were built after segregation, which also, as a legal concept was a southern issue, though the north did have discriminatory covenants attached to land. Also don't think that it is just white people excluding blacks. Blacks make it very clear that whites are not welcome in their communities. In reflection, most of the racism I've actually, personally seen has been blacks discriminating against whites.

Maybe I should've said communities rather than neighbourhoods because, yes, gentrification and "white flight" has had quite an effect on things, but the communities are almost as segregated as they were in the 50s.

I wholeheartedly believe that Michael Brown's mother and father killed him.

Wow.

No external input can have a greater impact on a child's life then their family.

Agreed. Where do those families come from again? They're created in society by society, aren't they?

Unless you'd like to just roundup these at risk kids and send them to reeducation camps, I don't see the kind society helping much.

A kind society doesn't just isolate and re-educate 'lost' children, it doesn't lose them in the first place. It prepares parents and provides adults with the opportunities and means to provide healthy upbringings for their children. "It takes a village to raise a child", not just because of the teachers, policemen, sex education and after-school programmes; parents need jobs and the ability to pursue them (in areas blighted by single parent families like those that have been left generation-after-generation over the last 30-40 years, this might mean more state-funded creches), they need access to fresh food and open spaces, they need all the things that any healthy adult needs to become a positive role model to their children - they need access to birth control and abortion to make sure they don't bring children into the world they're not prepared for. The best way to instill an "honest work ethic" in a child is to show him a hard working father or mother, you're absolutely right... but if your system is broken enough, it may take a couple of very difficult generations to reach that point. Every time the conversation is derailed by falling for ideas of biologically ingrained differences, by "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" rhetoric and police brutality, another child is consigned to the scrapheap. Another child is shown "their" society values them less than their neighbours. Another child becomes a shit parent and repeats the cycle.

Segregation is most insidious when it exists within the mind of people both sides of the schism... and you're right, there is plenty of prejudice amongst Black people about whites, but it strikes me as far more natural for one of the most famously and brutally wronged populations in the world to harbour mistrust of a country that was built on their enslavement and continues to treat them, however unofficially as second class citizens, than it does for one of the most famously privileged, comfortable and pampered populations the world has ever seen to continue to segregate and discriminate.

Our police forces have been very forcibly changed over the last twenty years. Many of the good guys have been squeezed out.

What were the dominant Police stories [almost exactly] 20 years ago? Oh yeah, brutality and race riots. So progress. Such changes.

[DJoe]

When you have a group of people that are so willing to disproportionately use deadly force, I wouldn't be surprised if officers perceived a greater threat when making arrests of black suspects. You can call it right or wrong, but I'm going to take your opinion with a grain of salt until you are the one making those arrests.

this is the bit i have an issue with.

You cannot claim that to judge someone's likelihood to resort to violence on the basis of their skin colour isn't racist.
That suggests that you think that black people naturally are more violent than white people.
which means you think that one race behaves in a different way to another race due to an difference in their biology.
Regardless of whether black people are statistically more likely to be violent or not. to use their colour of their skin to evaluate how likely they are to be violent is racist.
just like if you think a working class person is more likely to be violent, thats classist
you are judging them by their race
This thinking is based on racial theory or prejudice

also
This thinking is incorrect because 'A consensus consequently developed among anthropologists and geneticists that race as the previous generation had known it – as largely discrete, geographically distinct, gene pools – did not exist.'

there is no scientific evidence for 'races'

[DJoe]

race is a social construct

[nobody]

When you have a group of people that are so willing to disproportionately use deadly force, I wouldn't be surprised if officers perceived a greater threat when making arrests of black suspects. You can call it right or wrong, but I'm going to take your opinion with a grain of salt until you are the one making those arrests.

this is the bit i have an issue with.

You cannot claim that to judge someone's likelihood to resort to violence on the basis of their skin colour isn't racist.
That suggests that you think that black people naturally are more violent than white people.
which means you think that one race behaves in a different way to another race due to an difference in their biology.
Regardless of whether black people are statistically more likely to be violent or not. to use their colour of their skin to evaluate how likely they are to be violent is racist.
just like if you think a working class person is more likely to be violent, thats classist
you are judging them by their race
This thinking is based on racial theory or prejudice

also
This thinking is incorrect because 'A consensus consequently developed among anthropologists and geneticists that race as the previous generation had known it – as largely discrete, geographically distinct, gene pools – did not exist.'

there is no scientific evidence for 'races'

If you have two dogs, they both bite you but one of them bites you a lot more frequently, is it wrong to be more cautious around it?