-->
@drlebronski
pretty much but i do get why he would make that distinction
Do you think the disparity between penalties for powder-cocaine and crack-cocaine are evidence of systemic-racism™ ?
The many debates on systemic racism in America are flawed
Posts
Total:
238
-->
@3RU7AL
yes it is a law that disproportionately affects black people
-->
@3RU7AL
You made the point that a policy which is supposedly equally applied to all races, but intentionally created to disproportionately affect one particular race, is systemic racism - even if the letter of the law does not show it. I said that such an assertion requires stereotyping. "Hippies like weed." Whether it is true or not, that is a stereotype of hippies. To assume that a tax on weed was intentionally made to the detriment of hippies requires you to believe that stereotype, correct?
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
regardless of it being intentional or not it is true that black people are more likely to use powder coke
thus it disproportionally affects black people
stereotype: to believe unfairly that all people or things with a particular characteristic are the same
no ones saying every black person does drugs
its a fact they are more likely to
-->
@fauxlaw
A law need mention no specific ethnicity in order to target that ethnicity. Traditionally legal precedents and buisness practices have systematically oppressed many groups and continue to do so but even if all such policies ended right now the long term effects of such laws would remain. That is what makes it systematic.
-->
@drlebronski
I would use the word closer to this definition
Stereotype: a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
in that sense it is stereotyping but again doesn't take away from the argument since its a fact black people are more likely to do drugs.
-->
@drlebronski
in that sense it is stereotyping but again doesn't take away from the argument since its a fact black people are more likely to do drugs.
Sounds a bit racist...
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
lol no its not racist its a fact though you might be misunderstanding me black people (not all) are usually or more likely to be born in high poverty areas more likely to be surrounded by crime, more likely to have a dad in prison more likely to drop out more likely to do powdered drugs.
(i made my other post sound like they do drugs more than white people but actually "Hispanic and White students were more likely to report drug use and abuse than Asian and African American students prior to coming to college and during college." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2377408/ whites were more likely to do drugs but there are lots of factors that could contribute to this like population.
-->
@drlebronski
black people (not all) are usually or more likely to be born in high poverty areas more likely to be surrounded by crime, more likely to have a dad in prison more likely to drop out more likely to do powdered drugs.
Is that inevitable because of systemic racism?
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
You made the point that a policy which is supposedly equally applied to all races, but intentionally created to disproportionately affect one particular race, is systemic racism - even if the letter of the law does not show it. I said that such an assertion requires stereotyping. "Hippies like weed." Whether it is true or not, that is a stereotype of hippies. To assume that a tax on weed was intentionally made to the detriment of hippies requires you to believe that stereotype, correct?
Some "stereotypes" are based on real-world-data.
Some "stereotypes" are not based on real-world-data.
-->
@secularmerlin
A law need mention no specific ethnicity in order to target that ethnicity. Traditionally legal precedents and business practices have systematically oppressed many groups and continue to do so but even if all such policies ended right now the long term effects of such laws would remain. That is what makes it systematic.
Well stated.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
black people (not all) are usually or more likely to be born in high poverty areas more likely to be surrounded by crime, more likely to have a dad in prison more likely to drop out more likely to do powdered drugs.Is that inevitable because of systemic racism?
Is it inevitable that those oppressed by systematic racism will be more likely to live in the worst areas resorting to drugs and crime to survive and stave off hopelessness? That they will suffer unwanted pregnancy because of poorly available women's health services which results in a higher rate of unwed mothers with unwanted pregnancies? That they will be arrested for offenses that the privileged can simply regard as irrelevant?
Yes. It is inevitable that oppressed people will be oppressed in the ways they are oppressed. Is this even a question?
-->
@secularmerlin
So it is inevitable that black people are less intelligent, have inferior reading and critical thinking skills, will be more poor, be less qualified for jobs, do more drugs, and commit more crimes, etc. To phrase it differently, you have just said that it is inevitable that black people will be inferior to white people in almost every aspect of life. Because of super secret invisible racism, sometimes referred to as systemic racism.
-->
@3RU7AL
Some "stereotypes" are based on real-world-data.Some "stereotypes" are not based on real-world-data.
That didn't answer my question. But I'll make my point anyway.
Here was my statement in question:
Black people are poorer than white people.Black people are less intelligent than white people.Lower the standards and give more money to the poor unintelligent black people.The whole "problem" is solved.That is racism - both in its view of black people and its discrimination of white people.
I was showing how your argument requires one to engage in stereotyping to justify the anti-hippie policies. You have to apply the stereotype that hippies like weed and hate war, whether it is true or not. Using that same logic, policies that lower standards for black people and not white people require one to apply stereotypes to black people about their inferior intelligence and their ability to meet the standards - that is racist toward black people. It also requires one to be systemically racist toward white people.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
So it is inevitable that black people are less intelligent,
When did I ever see this? I said it is inevitable that more of an oppressed demographic will be socially disadvantaged than a demographic that is not. I would appreciate it if you address only the arguments I actually make.
To phrase it differently, you have just said that it is inevitable that black people will be inferior to white people in almost every aspect of life.
No I have only said that societies systematic oppression has the net consequence of limiting opportunities and promoting social ills. A poor person is not inferior to a rich person.
super secret invisible racism, sometimes referred to as systemic racism.
It is neither a secret nor particularly difficult to see. Culturally the United states has been oppressive to people of color. The effects are far reaching and cumulative. The point is not that any official government body states overtly that people of color should be oppressed but that official policy has tended in the past and continues to be skewed towards maintaining a status quo in which statistically people of color suffer disproportionately.
-->
@secularmerlin
When did I ever see this? I said it is inevitable that more of an oppressed demographic will be socially disadvantaged than a demographic that is not. I would appreciate it if you address only the arguments I actually make.
You inserted yourself into an argument that already had a context, and that seems to be what most people believe.
No I have only said that societies systematic oppression has the net consequence of limiting opportunities and promoting social ills. A poor person is not inferior to a rich person.
I never said they were. But if we are comparing personal monetary wealth -something that is repeatedly done by Critical Race Theorists - a person with less money is inferior in that aspect to a person with more money.
It is neither a secret nor particularly difficult to see. Culturally the United states has been oppressive to people of color.
Pretty much everyone agrees on this. But those systems of oppression have been dismantled. We got rid of slavery and segregation. Well at least until recently, but it's whites who are now being segregated against.
The point is not that any official government body states overtly that people of color should be oppressed but that official policy has tended in the past and continues to be skewed towards maintaining a status quo in which statistically people of color suffer disproportionately.
Right. There is no actual racism that can be pointed to. It's super secret invisible racism.
The argument is essentially that because the U.S. engaged in slavery in the distant past, black people today do more drugs than white people. And because of that, we should engage in actual systemic discrimination against white people. Because systemic discrimination against the supposed oppressors is good.
-->
@secularmerlin
Yes. It is inevitable that oppressed people will be oppressed in the ways they are oppressed. Is this even a question?
100% THIS.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Using that same logic, policies that lower standards for black people
Please be slightly more specific.
-->
@secularmerlin
No I have only said that societies systematic oppression has the net consequence of limiting opportunities and promoting social ills. A poor person is not inferior to a rich person.
Well stated.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
You inserted yourself into an argument that already had a context,
That's how a public forum works.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
The argument is essentially that because the U.S. engaged in slavery in the distant past,
Nope, that is NOT "the argument".
-->
@3RU7AL
Using that same logic, policies that lower standards for black peoplePlease be slightly more specific.
Affirmative Action is a great example.
You inserted yourself into an argument that already had a context,That's how a public forum works.
I have no problem with the public forum format. I was just telling him that my argument already had a particular context. There was no prior statement that he disagreed with that context. But now I know.
The argument is essentially that because the U.S. engaged in slavery in the distant past,Nope, that is NOT "the argument".
It is a generalized form of the argument. Though it not generalized by much.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Using that same logic, policies that lower standards for black peoplePlease be slightly more specific.Affirmative Action is a great example.
I do not generally support "Affirmative Action" policies.
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
The argument is essentially that because the U.S. engaged in slavery in the distant past,Nope, that is NOT "the argument".It is a generalized form of the argument. Though it not generalized by much.
-->
@3RU7AL
I do not generally support "Affirmative Action" policies.
Why not?
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
I do not generally support "Affirmative Action" policies.Why not?
I believe any policy that has an EXPLICIT and specific reference to skin-tone, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion and or creed should be deleted.
-->
@3RU7AL
I believe any policy that has an EXPLICIT and specific reference to skin-tone, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion and or creed should be deleted.
And since Affirmative Action gives preference to non-white people in terms of race, that would be an example of systemic racism against white people, correct?