The Fora: A Higher Education Community

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: mahagonny on June 25, 2020, 09:50:59 PM

Title: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 25, 2020, 09:50:59 PM
George Floyd was not a 'get the black guy' racial thing. Not really.
Glenn Loury and John McWhorter talking frankly. I thought it was good. I feel like I need to apologize for posting this, but honestly? These guys sound like they have common sense.
Your thoughts? I appreciate reading them even if I don't agree.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So7-_Sq1FP8
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 26, 2020, 04:05:54 AM
OK, and this is relevant too. The Woke Breaking Point.     https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/woke-breaking-point/

As I'm doing this I'm seeing my colleagues weighing in 'it's not the liberals who've been looting.' But they're confused about where to go from there. Some were saying, two weeks ago 'it's not liberals who are looting stores. There can be no associating them with our outrage.' But now they're saying 'well of course statues are being toppled and defaced. And notice, now we're finally having a conversation about race. The white establishment doesn't pay attention until something inconvenient happens to them.' But if you ask them 'OK, now that you believe we're thinking what do you want us to do?' And they don't have an answer except more intense outrage.
This is not how a society productively assesses what it is doing.
I don't see how depopulated urban areas in Chicago, Baltimore, Atlanta etc. can be restored without a sharp reduction in the inhabitants of those neighborhoods committing crimes against their own neighbors. But you can't talk about their personal responsibility or choices. You can only talk about how it's time for me, middle class Whitey, to change how I think and speak because a cop snuffed out a black man hundreds of miles away. It's crazy. The acceptable thought processes are getting fewer and fewer.
I guess this all should have been added to the original Floyd thread. Sorry if I added to fora clutter.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Treehugger on June 26, 2020, 04:47:27 AM
What if we have several “woke breaking points?” I have long since left the woke/social justice movement, but I am in a UU church which has unfortunately become more and more woke over the years (as I have moved in the other direction). Three Sundays ago, our religious education director did this for her children’s sermon: She spoke about the evils of “whiteness.” She showed a PowerPoint that linked Whiteness to a whole slew of other nouns including: Perfectionism; Punctuality; Property; Capitalism; etc. and after a 5 minute anti-whiteness screed literally yelled that these are all FACTS!!!

I haven’t been back to a service since.


Also, I joked with my husband if “whiteness” means “perfectionism” and “punctuality”, does that mean blackness is all about being late and doing slovenly work? Because, you know, that is kinda what it looks like .,,
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 26, 2020, 05:37:25 AM
What if we have several “woke breaking points?” I have long since left the woke/social justice movement, but I am in a UU church which has unfortunately become more and more woke over the years (as I have moved in the other direction). Three Sundays ago, our religious education director did this for her children’s sermon: She spoke about the evils of “whiteness.” She showed a PowerPoint that linked Whiteness to a whole slew of other nouns including: Perfectionism; Punctuality; Property; Capitalism; etc. and after a 5 minute anti-whiteness screed literally yelled that these are all FACTS!!!

I haven’t been back to a service since.


Also, I joked with my husband if “whiteness” means “perfectionism” and “punctuality”, does that mean blackness is all about being late and doing slovenly work? Because, you know, that is kinda what it looks like .,,

So much for
"There is none righteous, no not one"

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"

"In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free..."

Gee, where did those things come from? Some sort of heretical source obviously. And definitely not woke.
It obviously should be cancelled.

(Just in case it wasn't obvious, "all" isn't just "white people". And "none" is "inclusive".)

Where did the idea that "property" is somehow original to white societies come from? I'd love to hear the explanation of that one.

Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Treehugger on June 26, 2020, 06:46:02 AM
What if we have several “woke breaking points?” I have long since left the woke/social justice movement, but I am in a UU church which has unfortunately become more and more woke over the years (as I have moved in the other direction). Three Sundays ago, our religious education director did this for her children’s sermon: She spoke about the evils of “whiteness.” She showed a PowerPoint that linked Whiteness to a whole slew of other nouns including: Perfectionism; Punctuality; Property; Capitalism; etc. and after a 5 minute anti-whiteness screed literally yelled that these are all FACTS!!!

I haven’t been back to a service since.


Also, I joked with my husband if “whiteness” means “perfectionism” and “punctuality”, does that mean blackness is all about being late and doing slovenly work? Because, you know, that is kinda what it looks like .,,

So much for
"There is none righteous, no not one"

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"

"In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free..."

Gee, where did those things come from? Some sort of heretical source obviously. And definitely not woke.
It obviously should be cancelled.

(Just in case it wasn't obvious, "all" isn't just "white people". And "none" is "inclusive".)

Where did the idea that "property" is somehow original to white societies come from? I'd love to hear the explanation of that one.

Well, I am not, or rather, no longer a believer, but point taken.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 26, 2020, 08:20:03 AM
What if we have several “woke breaking points?” I have long since left the woke/social justice movement, but I am in a UU church which has unfortunately become more and more woke over the years (as I have moved in the other direction). Three Sundays ago, our religious education director did this for her children’s sermon: She spoke about the evils of “whiteness.” She showed a PowerPoint that linked Whiteness to a whole slew of other nouns including: Perfectionism; Punctuality; Property; Capitalism; etc. and after a 5 minute anti-whiteness screed literally yelled that these are all FACTS!!!

I haven’t been back to a service since.


Also, I joked with my husband if “whiteness” means “perfectionism” and “punctuality”, does that mean blackness is all about being late and doing slovenly work? Because, you know, that is kinda what it looks like .,,

So much for
"There is none righteous, no not one"

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"

"In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free..."

Gee, where did those things come from? Some sort of heretical source obviously. And definitely not woke.
It obviously should be cancelled.

(Just in case it wasn't obvious, "all" isn't just "white people". And "none" is "inclusive".)

Where did the idea that "property" is somehow original to white societies come from? I'd love to hear the explanation of that one.

Well, I am not, or rather, no longer a believer, but point taken.

As a Christian, I am frustrated when church leaders jump on the identity politics bandwagon, because identity politics is bad theology (as indicated by the references above). (And of course that is true of identity politics of both the left and right.)
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Hegemony on June 26, 2020, 01:50:51 PM
Oh, come on. Just because there is neither Gentile nor Jew, etc., in God's eyes, doesn't mean that there's no bigotry down here on earth. And just because some people on the left are over the top or illogical doesn't mean there's no point in opposing racism and bigotry. Let's be reasonable.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 26, 2020, 02:55:33 PM
Sure there's bigotry on earth. Because humans are human. What I'm thinking about more lately is not what causes bigotry (as the left obsesses about) but more how many different ways does it operate, exist, coexist with requirements of acceptable behavior.?
Casual observing:
Our daughter has a Chinese-American best friend from high school days. It's an inner city school, very diverse. When daughter came home from hanging out with the family, she'd say 'they're fun people, we have a blast together, but they are bigoted." "Against who?' "White people." "Wow, and you are comfortable around them?" "Yes, very. It's obvious they like me. Maybe they're too comfortable and that's why they let me see the bigotry. They make fun of white people as a category. For example, we order the stupidest thing on the menu. But they try to  make sure I know they don't mean us.' It interested me, because it seems that while certain American families, like this one that makes a nice living from American whites and others by  owning and operating several Chinese Food Restaurants, they don't feel the need to see themselves as free of bias. Nor are they looking for utopia. They're also not doing what black and white liberal America are doing now, either. They're not to the same extent infiltrating college curricula to overhaul our unconscious thinking habits.They're not trying to get more recognition for national holidays that honor their advocates. Their not getting Hollywood involved, or kneeling at football games. They stick together but they also circulate. They believe in the family unit and their crime rate is low. They're not making heroes out of the dregs among them as some blacks have done.  They're making money, running businesses, playing in orchestras, scoring high on SAT exams. Their attitude, when it's on the more swaggering or insolent side, might be more like 'hey white person, if there's a racial problem between you and me, it's yours. I'm OK.'
The anti-racism trend now appears to be the property of certain blacks. They want it, and they want to require you to jump through its hoops to prove you are not a hopeless misanthrope. And they're being egged on by liberal whites, and I don't think it's going to help them have better lives. The liberal whites are getting confused about what they believe or are eager to be part of a budding in-crowd.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: quasihumanist on June 26, 2020, 05:10:55 PM
Let's start from the beginning.

1) The primary problem is police brutality, particularly against black people.

2) A secondary problem is collective failure to care about or notice police brutality, particularly when the victims are black.

I don't think we can doubt that the following are both contributing factors to the prevalence of (1) and (2)

3) Some people are racist, and other people don't notice (possibly because they don't care much about) racism.

4) Americans are too accepting of violence, especially against people they perceive of as evil.

People are jumping on (3), because they see that as the key to solving (1) and (2).  The argument that solving (3) is the key to solving (1) and (2) frequently isn't made, because it's taken to be obvious.

I'd like to take on (4), but there don't seem to be too many takers, either because people think it's harder than (3), or because they think (3) is the main contributor to (4).
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 26, 2020, 05:12:12 PM
Sure there's bigotry on earth. Because humans are human. What I'm thinking about more lately is not what causes bigotry (as the left obsesses about) but more how many different ways does it operate, exist, coexist with requirements of acceptable behavior.?
Casual observing:
Our daughter has a Chinese-American best friend from high school days. It's an inner city school, very diverse. When daughter came home from hanging out with the family, she'd say 'they're fun people, we have a blast together, but they are bigoted." "Against who?' "White people." "Wow, and you are comfortable around them?" "Yes, very. It's obvious they like me. Maybe they're too comfortable and that's why they let me see the bigotry. They make fun of white people as a category. For example, we order the stupidest thing on the menu. But they try to  make sure I know they don't mean us.' It interested me, because it seems that while certain American families, like this one that makes a nice living from American whites and others by  owning and operating several Chinese Food Restaurants, they don't feel the need to see themselves as free of bias. Nor are they looking for utopia. They're also not doing what black and white liberal America are doing now, either. They're not to the same extent infiltrating college curricula to overhaul our unconscious thinking habits.They're not trying to get more recognition for national holidays that honor their advocates. Their not getting Hollywood involved, or kneeling at football games. They stick together but they also circulate. They believe in the family unit and their crime rate is low. They're not making heroes out of the dregs among them as some blacks have done.  They're making money, running businesses, playing in orchestras, scoring high on SAT exams. Their attitude, when it's on the more swaggering or insolent side, might be more like 'hey white person, if there's a racial problem between you and me, it's yours. I'm OK.'
The anti-racism trend now appears to be the property of certain blacks. They want it, and they want to require you to jump through its hoops to prove you are not a hopeless misanthrope. And they're being egged on by liberal whites, and I don't think it's going to help them have better lives. The liberal whites are getting confused about what they believe or are eager to be part of a budding in-crowd.

Wow.  Lot of “they” in this.  Just wow.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 26, 2020, 06:02:21 PM
Let's start from the beginning.

1) The primary problem is police brutality, particularly against black people.


Police brutality is equally wrong when done to anyone of any race. That is being overlooked.

Quote
2) A secondary problem is collective failure to care about or notice police brutality, particularly when the victims are black.

I would argue that there's a failure to care about police brutality in general, but the police brutality received by George Floyd and Rayshard Brooks has gotten tons of attention. I doubt you can name one individual who doesn't care. And the law has certainly done its part.

Accuracy please. Feelings are not facts.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Hegemony on June 26, 2020, 06:40:22 PM
Oh, for Pete's sake. All lives matter! Yes, they do! And there is a disproportionate amount of police brutality aimed at black people! ("But, you see, black people, well, they bring it on themselves by ... sleeping in bed, or going jogging!  They should stop other black people being criminals if they never want to be identified as a criminal!")  Yeah, and white people should stop other white people from being complete jackasses and unaware bigoted monstrosities, but oh, if only we could.  Apparently we can't.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 26, 2020, 06:53:10 PM
Oh, for Pete's sake. All lives matter! Yes, they do! And there is a disproportionate amount of police brutality aimed at black people!

This is something I keep hearing, but never with credible sources/numbers identified. I need more information to believe it.
How are we calculating this? By blacks being only some 13% of the population but receiving more than 13% of the brutal treatment? That might be assuming that only 13% of the encounters with policemen involve blacks, or that there isn't more criminal activity in black neighborhoods. Which I have never seen anyone show.

Oh, for Pete's sake. All lives matter! Yes, they do! And there is a disproportionate amount of police brutality aimed at black people! ("But, you see, black people, well, they bring it on themselves by ... sleeping in bed, or going jogging!  They should stop other black people being criminals if they never want to be identified as a criminal!")  Yeah, and white people should stop other white people from being complete jackasses and unaware bigoted monstrosities, but oh, if only we could.  Apparently we can't.

I guess I get the larger point...sorta. Perhaps you'd elaborate.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 26, 2020, 07:22:44 PM
Oh, for Pete's sake. All lives matter! Yes, they do! And there is a disproportionate amount of police brutality aimed at black people!

This is something I keep hearing, but never with credible sources/numbers identified. I need more information to believe it.
How are we calculating this? By blacks being only some 13% of the population but receiving more than 13% of the brutal treatment? That might be assuming that only 13% of the encounters with policemen involve blacks, or that there isn't more criminal activity in black neighborhoods. Which I have never seen anyone show.

Oh, for Pete's sake. All lives matter! Yes, they do! And there is a disproportionate amount of police brutality aimed at black people! ("But, you see, black people, well, they bring it on themselves by ... sleeping in bed, or going jogging!  They should stop other black people being criminals if they never want to be identified as a criminal!")  Yeah, and white people should stop other white people from being complete jackasses and unaware bigoted monstrosities, but oh, if only we could.  Apparently we can't.

I guess I get the larger point...sorta. Perhaps you'd elaborate.

You could do some research;  It isn’t hard to find.  No one has to deliver the information to you.  Also, I put the sentence about criminality in boldface just because it stood out.  Shame on you. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Economizer on June 26, 2020, 07:37:09 PM
Well, I live in a comfortable and beautiful smallish Souhern city with classic and modern architecture that embraces a history earned over two centuries. There has been social and societal change while the character and calmness of the town has been for the most part uninterupted. Topple what, rally against what, who are these that want what, why really? I have come to wonder whether the young and old, rich and poor, black and white, visitors, and those on assignments would absolutley hate any rapid or radical change here? Uhhh..bar owners, nightlife opportunists, maybe?
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 26, 2020, 07:38:19 PM
A panel discussion (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2vctUezliE) from the Manhattan Institute.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: pepsi_alum on June 26, 2020, 08:22:00 PM
I've refrained from participating in race-related discussions here because I suspect it's mostly an exercise in futility. I would note, however, that there will likely be ongoing public policy discussions in the years ahead about the role of police in the United States and structural racism more generally whether you like it or not.

My sense is that any policy-level reforms that eventually occur are more likely to be incremental than radical.  Black Lives Matter probably will not get every policy they want; white people who deny the existence of structural racism probably will not be thrilled either. The fact that Joe Biden has an 87% lead over Trump among Black voters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/black-americans-say-racism-policing-top-issues-for-november-favor-biden-by-huge-margin-post-ipsos-poll-finds/2020/06/24/9143b254-b645-11ea-aca5-ebb63d27e1ff_story.html) even while he simultaneously rejects several of the demands made by Black Lives Matter (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjMrL_Bg6HqAhWuHDQIHdrrDukQxfQBCCwwAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fnews%2Fmagazine%2F2020%2F06%2F26%2Fjoe-biden-refuses-get-woke-will-the-democratic-base-still-embrace-him-340753&usg=AOvVaw186WExqgi7NirTOMy0T-K8) suggests that people are more nuanced in their thinking about race relations than the discourse in this thread might suggest.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: downer on June 27, 2020, 04:32:05 AM
I've refrained from participating in race-related discussions here because I suspect it's mostly an exercise in futility. I would note, however, that there will likely be ongoing public policy discussions in the years ahead about the role of police in the United States and structural racism more generally whether you like it or not.

My sense is that any policy-level reforms that eventually occur are more likely to be incremental than radical.  Black Lives Matter probably will not get every policy they want; white people who deny the existence of structural racism probably will not be thrilled either. The fact that Joe Biden has an 87% lead over Trump among Black voters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/black-americans-say-racism-policing-top-issues-for-november-favor-biden-by-huge-margin-post-ipsos-poll-finds/2020/06/24/9143b254-b645-11ea-aca5-ebb63d27e1ff_story.html) even while he simultaneously rejects several of the demands made by Black Lives Matter (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjMrL_Bg6HqAhWuHDQIHdrrDukQxfQBCCwwAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fnews%2Fmagazine%2F2020%2F06%2F26%2Fjoe-biden-refuses-get-woke-will-the-democratic-base-still-embrace-him-340753&usg=AOvVaw186WExqgi7NirTOMy0T-K8) suggests that people are more nuanced in their thinking about race relations than the discourse in this thread might suggest.

In my town there is a street with a couple of Trump 2020 flags flying outside people's houses. One of their neighbors has a yard sign saying "Anyone But Trump." I think that captures most people's thinking.

I watched the video shared by the OP with interest, along with Bret Weinstein and John McWhorter: George Floyd Protests and Race in America (https://youtu.be/Y-FOCZVLTaw). It was a little hard to separate out the general gloominess of the speakers attitudes from their particular claims. One central empirical claim is that police killings are not racially biased because they kill non-blacks in proportional numbers. This is a claim I've seen set out before, alongside an admission that other police violence is disproportionately directed at blacks.

There seemed to be some suggestion that the central social problem is poverty rather than race, with the acknowledgement that poverty affects the black population disproportionalately. So do Glen Loury and John McWhorter agree there is structural racism or not? They seemed to be saying yes and no.

There were also claims about the failings of blacks themselves regarding crime, and the need to take responsibility.

And there were digs at affirmative action.

Then there was plenty of concern that critical race theory could lead to the end of democracy. And lots of worry about the "woke" crowd quashing freedom of speech. They claimed that universities as a whole should not be taking political positions. It's an interesting idea, but I didn't hear an argument for it.

Their concerns seemed overblown when it comes to academic life.

When university presidents send out emails endorsing the need for racial justice, I really don't take that as an endorsement of critical race theory or even identity politics. Indeed, I don't think that most of the people who go on protests against police violence and those who put up BLM banners in their windows or yards are endorsing critical race theory either.

One of my major reservations about the current protests has been that there haven't been a clear set of solutions proposed. "Defund the police" seems to mean something different to whoever proposes it.  I've seen plenty of ideas proposed, but there's no consensus. So all I see is a desire for more social justice, which seems bland to me.

What wasn't clear to me from the video was what solutions Glen Loury or John McWhorter are proposing for the high rate of police killings in the US. They were skeptical about the "defund the police" approach and other previously suggested solutions. But they didn't propose any alternatives.

Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 27, 2020, 06:37:59 AM

What wasn't clear to me from the video was what solutions Glen Loury or John McWhorter are proposing for the high rate of police killings in the US. They were skeptical about the "defund the police" approach and other previously suggested solutions. But they didn't propose any alternatives.

In the link I posted, Coleman Hughes pointed out that the rate of police killings is much lower than it was a few decades ago, but this rarely gets mentioned. Also, part of the problem is the American gun culture. In coutries with few guns, police don't have to worry about someone reaching into their coat for what is supposed to be a driver's license. In the USA, especially in heavily-armed neighbourhoods, a second of hesitation by a cop could get them killed, so they have to be much more anxious about that to stay alive.

Here's a study (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/08/a-closer-look-at-police-officers-who-have-fired-their-weapon-on-duty/) from the Pew Research Center.

From the article:
Quote
Many Americans believe it is common for police officers to fire their guns. About three-in-ten adults estimate that police fire their weapons a few times a year while on duty, and more than eight-in-ten (83%) estimate that the typical officer has fired his or her service weapon at least once in their careers, outside of firearms training or on a gun range, according to a recent Pew Research Center national survey.


In fact, only about a quarter (27%) of all officers say they have ever fired their service weapon while on the job, according to a separate Pew Research Center survey conducted by the National Police Research Platform. The survey was conducted May 19-Aug. 14, 2016, among a nationally representative sample of 7,917 sworn officers working in 54 police and sheriff’s departments with 100 or more officers.

Just for some reality.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: writingprof on June 27, 2020, 06:39:08 AM
Sure there's bigotry on earth. Because humans are human. What I'm thinking about more lately is not what causes bigotry (as the left obsesses about) but more how many different ways does it operate, exist, coexist with requirements of acceptable behavior.?
Casual observing:
Our daughter has a Chinese-American best friend from high school days. It's an inner city school, very diverse. When daughter came home from hanging out with the family, she'd say 'they're fun people, we have a blast together, but they are bigoted." "Against who?' "White people." "Wow, and you are comfortable around them?" "Yes, very. It's obvious they like me. Maybe they're too comfortable and that's why they let me see the bigotry. They make fun of white people as a category. For example, we order the stupidest thing on the menu. But they try to  make sure I know they don't mean us.' It interested me, because it seems that while certain American families, like this one that makes a nice living from American whites and others by  owning and operating several Chinese Food Restaurants, they don't feel the need to see themselves as free of bias. Nor are they looking for utopia. They're also not doing what black and white liberal America are doing now, either. They're not to the same extent infiltrating college curricula to overhaul our unconscious thinking habits.They're not trying to get more recognition for national holidays that honor their advocates. Their not getting Hollywood involved, or kneeling at football games. They stick together but they also circulate. They believe in the family unit and their crime rate is low. They're not making heroes out of the dregs among them as some blacks have done.  They're making money, running businesses, playing in orchestras, scoring high on SAT exams. Their attitude, when it's on the more swaggering or insolent side, might be more like 'hey white person, if there's a racial problem between you and me, it's yours. I'm OK.'
The anti-racism trend now appears to be the property of certain blacks. They want it, and they want to require you to jump through its hoops to prove you are not a hopeless misanthrope. And they're being egged on by liberal whites, and I don't think it's going to help them have better lives. The liberal whites are getting confused about what they believe or are eager to be part of a budding in-crowd.

Wow.  Lot of “they” in this.  Just wow.

What would you prefer? "Hu"?
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Economizer on June 27, 2020, 07:00:19 AM
As there have been mny suggestions for changes in incident response here and in other.media, I make these two points:

1. Someone will have to arrive first and immediately initate actions.

2. I remember times in our country when "the men in the white costs" were called in to remove
    and control non violent[?] subjects. Are we headed back to that? Those "attendents"
    were said to have issues generated by their control and suppression tactics as well.
     
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Economizer on June 27, 2020, 07:09:42 AM
As there have been mny suggestions for changes in incident response here and in other.media, I make these two points:

1. Someone will have to arrive first and immediately initate actions.

2. I remember times in our country when "the men in the white costs" were called in to remove and control non violent[?] subjects. Are we headed back to that? Those "attendents" were said to have issues generated by their control and suppression tactics as well.
   
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 27, 2020, 07:42:37 AM

One of my major reservations about the current protests has been that there haven't been a clear set of solutions proposed. "Defund the police" seems to mean something different to whoever proposes it.  I've seen plenty of ideas proposed, but there's no consensus. So all I see is a desire for more social justice, which seems bland to me.


In my school their goal is to get white faculty to read more books about white supremacy and to bring that term into as many discussions as they can, and keep the conversation around things that oppress black Americans.   This includes not just the diversity staff but the faculty union, which is supposed to be there to advocate for working conditions, pay, job security of faculty the college has been, appropriately, at liberty to hire, based on their need for qualified teachers of any and all races. That part bugs me a bit, especially in these times where many of us are going to be losing credit hours and courses. Your right to have work should be based on your productivity.
BLM needs to ask what are they going to ask of each other.
What do you think would happen if one of  my lilly white colleagues were to write college wide email saying 'thank you for recommending the books White Fragility, etc. I recommend to you a few by Loury, McWhorter, Larry Elder, et al just to add to the pool of interesting thoughts?' I think pandemonium would the result. Yet you should be able to do this in an academic environment.
I'm not that worried about the reading list. I may even peruse. You know what happens when you give someone too big a reading list. They don't do it, and then you've got the problem.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: downer on June 27, 2020, 08:05:12 AM

What wasn't clear to me from the video was what solutions Glen Loury or John McWhorter are proposing for the high rate of police killings in the US. They were skeptical about the "defund the police" approach and other previously suggested solutions. But they didn't propose any alternatives.

In the link I posted, Coleman Hughes pointed out that the rate of police killings is much lower than it was a few decades ago, but this rarely gets mentioned. Also, part of the problem is the American gun culture. In coutries with few guns, police don't have to worry about someone reaching into their coat for what is supposed to be a driver's license. In the USA, especially in heavily-armed neighbourhoods, a second of hesitation by a cop could get them killed, so they have to be much more anxious about that to stay alive.

You don't address policy solutions to further reduce police killings. What has led to those decreases.

It sounds like you are recommending gun control as a solution. I agree.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: downer on June 27, 2020, 08:09:06 AM

One of my major reservations about the current protests has been that there haven't been a clear set of solutions proposed. "Defund the police" seems to mean something different to whoever proposes it.  I've seen plenty of ideas proposed, but there's no consensus. So all I see is a desire for more social justice, which seems bland to me.


In my school their goal is to get white faculty to read more books about white supremacy and to bring that term into as many discussions as they can, and keep the conversation around things that oppress black Americans.   This includes not just the diversity staff but the faculty union, which is supposed to be there to advocate for working conditions, pay, job security of faculty the college has been, appropriately, at liberty to hire, based on their need for qualified teachers of any and all races. That part bugs me a bit, especially in these times where many of us are going to be losing credit hours and courses. Your right to have work should be based on your productivity.
BLM needs to ask what are they going to ask of each other.
What do you think would happen if one of  my lilly white colleagues were to write college wide email saying 'thank you for recommending the books White Fragility, etc. I recommend to you a few by Loury, McWhorter, Larry Elder, et al just to add to the pool of interesting thoughts?' I think pandemonium would the result. Yet you should be able to do this in an academic environment.
I'm not that worried about the reading list. I may even peruse. You know what happens when you give someone too big a reading list. They don't do it, and then you've got the problem.

What if you replied: "Sorry, this is not part of what I get paid to do. If you want me to read those books, you will need to pay me to do so." ?  That's the reply I'd be tempted to give.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: apl68 on June 27, 2020, 08:51:33 AM
Oh, for Pete's sake. All lives matter! Yes, they do! And there is a disproportionate amount of police brutality aimed at black people!

This is something I keep hearing, but never with credible sources/numbers identified. I need more information to believe it.
How are we calculating this? By blacks being only some 13% of the population but receiving more than 13% of the brutal treatment? That might be assuming that only 13% of the encounters with policemen involve blacks, or that there isn't more criminal activity in black neighborhoods. Which I have never seen anyone show.


There's more criminal activity in black neighborhoods, but there's also widespread evidence that many police forces take a more heavy-handed approach toward black neighborhoods and toward black youth.  It's this heavy-handedness, and the resentment that it stores up in black communities, that lies behind the explosions of protest and rioting that occasional exceptionally egregious cases like the Floyd killing set off.  There's an urgent need to address this issue more effectively and consistently than it has been in the past.

I share your concern about excessive anti-police rhetoric, focus on identity politics, and talk about "defunding" and "dismantling" police forces.  I'm concerned that these sorts of radical excesses will make it harder to pursue the needed legitimate reforms.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 27, 2020, 09:06:10 AM

What wasn't clear to me from the video was what solutions Glen Loury or John McWhorter are proposing for the high rate of police killings in the US. They were skeptical about the "defund the police" approach and other previously suggested solutions. But they didn't propose any alternatives.

In the link I posted, Coleman Hughes pointed out that the rate of police killings is much lower than it was a few decades ago, but this rarely gets mentioned. Also, part of the problem is the American gun culture. In coutries with few guns, police don't have to worry about someone reaching into their coat for what is supposed to be a driver's license. In the USA, especially in heavily-armed neighbourhoods, a second of hesitation by a cop could get them killed, so they have to be much more anxious about that to stay alive.

You don't address policy solutions to further reduce police killings. What has led to those decreases.

It sounds like you are recommending gun control as a solution. I agree.

Policies like mandatory bodycams make a lot of sense and have broad support. They have nothing specific to do with race.

Gun ownership is as popular with noisy people on one end of the political spectrum as defunding the police is with the noisy people on the other, and since nuance is obliterated, there doesn't seem to be much room for collaboration and compromise. (Although polls of actual voters, not just the screamers, actually show more consensus than popular media lead you to believe.)
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: downer on June 27, 2020, 10:29:41 AM

Policies like mandatory bodycams make a lot of sense and have broad support. They have nothing specific to do with race.


So did the Scared Straight program and to some extent the Abstinence pledges. But it turned out that they didn't work at all, and they were counter productive.

There's no evidence that body cams make any difference. In fact, there is evidence  (https://www.pnas.org/content/116/21/10329)they don't.

So I'm still looking for one good proposal.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 27, 2020, 10:31:30 AM
Sure there's bigotry on earth. Because humans are human. What I'm thinking about more lately is not what causes bigotry (as the left obsesses about) but more how many different ways does it operate, exist, coexist with requirements of acceptable behavior.?
Casual observing:
Our daughter has a Chinese-American best friend from high school days. It's an inner city school, very diverse. When daughter came home from hanging out with the family, she'd say 'they're fun people, we have a blast together, but they are bigoted." "Against who?' "White people." "Wow, and you are comfortable around them?" "Yes, very. It's obvious they like me. Maybe they're too comfortable and that's why they let me see the bigotry. They make fun of white people as a category. For example, we order the stupidest thing on the menu. But they try to  make sure I know they don't mean us.' It interested me, because it seems that while certain American families, like this one that makes a nice living from American whites and others by  owning and operating several Chinese Food Restaurants, they don't feel the need to see themselves as free of bias. Nor are they looking for utopia. They're also not doing what black and white liberal America are doing now, either. They're not to the same extent infiltrating college curricula to overhaul our unconscious thinking habits.They're not trying to get more recognition for national holidays that honor their advocates. Their not getting Hollywood involved, or kneeling at football games. They stick together but they also circulate. They believe in the family unit and their crime rate is low. They're not making heroes out of the dregs among them as some blacks have done.  They're making money, running businesses, playing in orchestras, scoring high on SAT exams. Their attitude, when it's on the more swaggering or insolent side, might be more like 'hey white person, if there's a racial problem between you and me, it's yours. I'm OK.'
The anti-racism trend now appears to be the property of certain blacks. They want it, and they want to require you to jump through its hoops to prove you are not a hopeless misanthrope. And they're being egged on by liberal whites, and I don't think it's going to help them have better lives. The liberal whites are getting confused about what they believe or are eager to be part of a budding in-crowd.

Wow.  Lot of “they” in this.  Just wow.

What would you prefer? "Hu"?
I would prefer to be in a different discussion, which is where I’ll be after hitting “post.”
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 27, 2020, 10:38:31 AM

Policies like mandatory bodycams make a lot of sense and have broad support. They have nothing specific to do with race.


So did the Scared Straight program and to some extent the Abstinence pledges. But it turned out that they didn't work at all, and they were counter productive.

There's no evidence that body cams make any difference. In fact, there is evidence  (https://www.pnas.org/content/116/21/10329)they don't.



Whether they directly change behaviour or not isn't as important as the fact that when there is an accusation of misconduct, there will be evidence other than testimony which can be used to make a judgement. That's a HUGE improvement. Let's face it; it's the video of the George Floyd situation that made it blow up, not the mere testimony that it happened.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: pepsi_alum on June 27, 2020, 03:03:07 PM
When university presidents send out emails endorsing the need for racial justice, I really don't take that as an endorsement of critical race theory or even identity politics. Indeed, I don't think that most of the people who go on protests against police violence and those who put up BLM banners in their windows or yards are endorsing critical race theory either.

One of my major reservations about the current protests has been that there haven't been a clear set of solutions proposed. "Defund the police" seems to mean something different to whoever proposes it.  I've seen plenty of ideas proposed, but there's no consensus. So all I see is a desire for more social justice, which seems bland to me.

What wasn't clear to me from the video was what solutions Glen Loury or John McWhorter are proposing for the high rate of police killings in the US. They were skeptical about the "defund the police" approach and other previously suggested solutions. But they didn't propose any alternatives.

I agee on all points, Downer. I think it's possible (even probable) that many people recognize there are serious issues with policing in the United States and believe that something should be done about it, but don't endorse critical race theory or "defund the police." For the record, I don't think that "defund" is quite the right verb. "Reform and reorganize the police" doesn't have quite the same panache, but that's essentially what happened in places like Camden, New Jersey (https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2020/06/11/police-reform-camden-new-jersey-rebuilt-its-police-department) that successfully rebuilt frayed community-law enforcement relations.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 27, 2020, 04:22:49 PM
Oh, for Pete's sake. All lives matter! Yes, they do! And there is a disproportionate amount of police brutality aimed at black people!

This is something I keep hearing, but never with credible sources/numbers identified. I need more information to believe it.
How are we calculating this? By blacks being only some 13% of the population but receiving more than 13% of the brutal treatment? That might be assuming that only 13% of the encounters with policemen involve blacks, or that there isn't more criminal activity in black neighborhoods. Which I have never seen anyone show.


There's more criminal activity in black neighborhoods, but there's also widespread evidence that many police forces take a more heavy-handed approach toward black neighborhoods and toward black youth.  It's this heavy-handedness, and the resentment that it stores up in black communities, that lies behind the explosions of protest and rioting that occasional exceptionally egregious cases like the Floyd killing set off.  There's an urgent need to address this issue more effectively and consistently than it has been in the past.


The situation with Floyd as I understand it was officer Keung (sad story here: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/27/us/minneapolis-police-officer-kueng.html) and the other rookie who tried to get Floyd into the patrol car. He complained of claustrophobia, which sounds odd to me, because when they found him he was sitting in his car, but then he was way stoned, so probably talking ragtime. They relented whereupon Chauvin and the other cop with the long list of violence on the job complaints came in and subdued him and we know the rest of the unfortunate scene.

Sometimes the guy with the most confidence and experience gets to be boss, but he may be the worst choice. This happens in my workplace too.

I would expect in areas where the concentration of criminality is greater the amount of stress and fear experienced by the police is greater so the errors are more numerous. We are entitled to the best they can do, but it won't be perfect. Over the course of the summer I wouldn't be at all surprised if it gets worse.

My heart doesn't bleed for the cops that much, although Alex Keung's story is heart wrenching. Some of them get pretty cushy deals. I mainly object to the pressure for everyone to put on BLM T-shirts (including, like the North Carolina Courage girls soccer team) and rave about white supremacy.

Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: bento on June 27, 2020, 05:19:16 PM
"Somebody finally says it":  No, it's been said for a very long time in this country.  It's the default defense of white bullies.  It's the oldest American story.  It's depressing to see it celebrated as some sort of awakening, on an academic forum.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 27, 2020, 05:59:49 PM
"Somebody finally says it":  No, it's been said for a very long time in this country.  It's the default defense of white bullies.  It's the oldest American story.  It's depressing to see it celebrated as some sort of awakening, on an academic forum.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm not an academic. I'm an adjunct. I just come in and teach my subject. I teach people from all over the world, and I have a lot of investment in their progress and affection for them, but the diversitarianism publishing and career advancing gravy train left without me, so I just say whatever I truly think. Or at least Mahagonny does.

And in case you missed it with Joe Biden, 'you're not black' bombed...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2vctUezliE
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 27, 2020, 06:46:46 PM
"Somebody finally says it":  No, it's been said for a very long time in this country.  It's the default defense of white bullies.  It's the oldest American story.  It's depressing to see it celebrated as some sort of awakening, on an academic forum.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm not an academic. I'm an adjunct. I just come in and teach my subject. I teach people from all over the world, and I have a lot of investment in their progress and affection for them, but the diversitarianism publishing and career advancing gravy train left without me, so I just say whatever I truly think. Or at least Mahagonny does.

And in case you missed it with Joe Biden, 'you're not black' bombed...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2vctUezliE

This makes me feel better. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Treehugger on June 27, 2020, 06:51:32 PM
"Somebody finally says it":  No, it's been said for a very long time in this country.  It's the default defense of white bullies.  It's the oldest American story.  It's depressing to see it celebrated as some sort of awakening, on an academic forum.

To be honest, there is definitely bullying on both sides. Have you seen that “silence = violence” slogan? Pure bullying. As if someone who chooses to do anything else with their time than be an anti-racist is committing violence? So if a single white woman is too busy struggling to both work and be a mother to be an anti-racist, she is committing “violence’?” If someone is too busy caring for an elderly parent to really care about anti-racism, they are committing “violence?” Let’s say that race just isn’t someone’s thing and they are much more into environmentalism and trying to do their part to save the planet, they are engaging in “violence?” Let’s say someone is too busy trying to find a vaccine against Covid to participate in a protest march, is their silence “violence?” Or let’s say there was a white woman who was actually brutally stranger raped by a black man (it does happen you know), is she committing “violence” if she doesn’t drop everything in her life to be an anti-racist?

Before anyone says, “Oh, that was just one silly sign,” you know that that is not true. I have heard and read the “if you are not actively for us, you are a white supremacist” all too many times. As if white/black race relations were the. most. important. thing. in the history of the cosmos for everyone. Well, guess what? They aren’t. Nor should they be.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 27, 2020, 09:22:58 PM
Quote
'What wasn't clear to me from the video was what solutions Glen Loury or John McWhorter are proposing for the high rate of police killings in the US. They were skeptical about the "defund the police" approach and other previously suggested solutions. But they didn't propose any alternatives.

Sometimes it's the people who have solutions who are the biggest problem. And how do you define 'high rate of killings?' There is no consensus on that. There is the usual 'even one unnecessary killing by police is too many' which is impossible to disagree with until you consider (1) there is a steady supply of criminal activity in our midst, and (2) when you hire a cop, it has to be a human being. There aren't any Lucas McCains or Matt Dillons who always think quickly and rationally and never err and only shoot straight. They are fictional people.

I'm wondering as the months pass will we find out that Derek Chauvin and Tou Thau, each with numerous complaints of violence, were being shielded by their union. That could be a clock that needs cleaning.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 27, 2020, 09:57:35 PM
Quote
'What wasn't clear to me from the video was what solutions Glen Loury or John McWhorter are proposing for the high rate of police killings in the US. They were skeptical about the "defund the police" approach and other previously suggested solutions. But they didn't propose any alternatives.

Sometimes it's the people who have solutions who are the biggest problem. And how do you define 'high rate of killings?' There is no consensus on that. There is the usual 'even one unnecessary killing by police is too many' which is impossible to disagree with until you consider (1) there is a steady supply of criminal activity in our midst, and (2) when you hire a cop, it has to be a human being. There aren't any Lucas McCains or Matt Dillons who always think quickly and rationally and never err and only shoot straight. They are fictional people.

I'm wondering as the months pass will we find out that Derek Chauvin and Tou Thau, each with numerous complaints of violence, were being shielded by their union. That could be a clock that needs cleaning.

You may find it impossible to agree with when you justify it with rhetoric like that.  I think that the when you attach a human life to the “one unnecessary killing,” things get clearer.  That “one” is someone’s child, a person, a human being, and his or her life was taken away “unnecessarily.”  Your language is similar to that found in racial science narratives and eugenics narrative.  Actually, it is similar to that found in social scientific research and scholarship on black and Hispanic urban communities. 

It’s actually hate speech.  And it is repugnant. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 28, 2020, 12:45:26 AM
Baldwinsville, for Christ's sake, don't be naive.
Note: the killing of George Floyd is not being treated as acceptable; it's being treated as a felony murder, and there's no one objecting to that from any quarter. It's unanimous. Whereas, also, the incidence of police killings in the future whether accidental or something where the police are more culpable than incompetence or mistake is a certainty. But we could elect you to change that if you have a plan. Your turn at bat, friend. No possibility of police killings, ever again. How? What's involved in the trade?
And what does 'hate speech' mean where Daniel Shaver was concerned? That I hate white people?
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: ergative on June 28, 2020, 03:09:01 AM
"Somebody finally says it":  No, it's been said for a very long time in this country.  It's the default defense of white bullies.  It's the oldest American story.  It's depressing to see it celebrated as some sort of awakening, on an academic forum.

To be honest, there is definitely bullying on both sides. Have you seen that “silence = violence” slogan? Pure bullying. As if someone who chooses to do anything else with their time than be an anti-racist is committing violence? So if a single white woman is too busy struggling to both work and be a mother to be an anti-racist, she is committing “violence’?” If someone is too busy caring for an elderly parent to really care about anti-racism, they are committing “violence?” Let’s say that race just isn’t someone’s thing and they are much more into environmentalism and trying to do their part to save the planet, they are engaging in “violence?” Let’s say someone is too busy trying to find a vaccine against Covid to participate in a protest march, is their silence “violence?” Or let’s say there was a white woman who was actually brutally stranger raped by a black man (it does happen you know), is she committing “violence” if she doesn’t drop everything in her life to be an anti-racist?

Before anyone says, “Oh, that was just one silly sign,” you know that that is not true. I have heard and read the “if you are not actively for us, you are a white supremacist” all too many times. As if white/black race relations were the. most. important. thing. in the history of the cosmos for everyone. Well, guess what? They aren’t. Nor should they be.

Actually, I won't say 'oh, that was just one silly sign.' Instead, I'll say that whataboutism is a bad-faith argument against the genuine need for allies against racism. The people who genuinely don't have time or resources to engage are not the people that this sign is targeting (although I wonder what your response would be if that rape survivor decided that instead of anti-black bigotry she would instead react with anti-man bigotry. #notallmen, or do you also stand up for her right to hate all dudes?) Rather, it's the people who know what's going on, who have the resources to fight back, and who choose instead to prioritize something that is objectively less important.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Treehugger on June 28, 2020, 04:43:06 AM
"Somebody finally says it":  No, it's been said for a very long time in this country.  It's the default defense of white bullies.  It's the oldest American story.  It's depressing to see it celebrated as some sort of awakening, on an academic forum.

To be honest, there is definitely bullying on both sides. Have you seen that “silence = violence” slogan? Pure bullying. As if someone who chooses to do anything else with their time than be an anti-racist is committing violence? So if a single white woman is too busy struggling to both work and be a mother to be an anti-racist, she is committing “violence’?” If someone is too busy caring for an elderly parent to really care about anti-racism, they are committing “violence?” Let’s say that race just isn’t someone’s thing and they are much more into environmentalism and trying to do their part to save the planet, they are engaging in “violence?” Let’s say someone is too busy trying to find a vaccine against Covid to participate in a protest march, is their silence “violence?” Or let’s say there was a white woman who was actually brutally stranger raped by a black man (it does happen you know), is she committing “violence” if she doesn’t drop everything in her life to be an anti-racist?

Before anyone says, “Oh, that was just one silly sign,” you know that that is not true. I have heard and read the “if you are not actively for us, you are a white supremacist” all too many times. As if white/black race relations were the. most. important. thing. in the history of the cosmos for everyone. Well, guess what? They aren’t. Nor should they be.

Actually, I won't say 'oh, that was just one silly sign.' Instead, I'll say that whataboutism is a bad-faith argument against the genuine need for allies against racism. The people who genuinely don't have time or resources to engage are not the people that this sign is targeting (although I wonder what your response would be if that rape survivor decided that instead of anti-black bigotry she would instead react with anti-man bigotry. #notallmen, or do you also stand up for her right to hate all dudes?) Rather, it's the people who know what's going on, who have the resources to fight back, and who choose instead to prioritize something that is objectively less important.

So, I see you have failed to get my point. Has this puerile “if you aren’t whole-heartedly actively for us 100% of the time mean you are a bigot” mentality now become so ingrained that you can’t help yourself? Hint: If a white women who was raped by a black man doesn’t feel like rushing out in the middle of a pandemic and protesting, that doesn’t mean she is reacting with “anti-black bigotry.” Maybe she is just doing something else with her time. Or does the fact that she was raped make her someone more responsible than the average white woman?

Speaking as a white woman who was indeed violently sexually assaulted and held prisoner by a black gang many years ago, as someone who has more or less succeeded in rising above her own past and going for months on end without giving it any serious thought, as someone who by nature is more of an intellectual than an activist, as someone who has always played the devil’s advocate and hated self-righteous groupthink of any nature, I whole-heartedly claim a neutral middle ground and will continue to do so whenever anyone has the indecency to deny that to me.

Oh and by the way, I don’t hate men and I don’t hate blacks and I don’t hate “white supremacists” and I dont’t hate Trump supporters. I don’t hate queers and I don’t hate straights and I don’t hate peoples who use whatever pronoun they feel like using.  I don’t hate groups of people. I also don’t hate myself. I have hated admittedly my mother, but I have mostly grown out of that.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: ergative on June 28, 2020, 05:44:31 AM
Ah, I think we're getting confused by absolutes. I don't at all agree with the statement 'If you aren't wholeheartedly actively for us 100% of the time that means you are a bigot.' I agree with you that this is going way too far.  If you, because of your past experiences, cannot bring yourself to engage with this, that's cool. You look after yourself first. You are the people I mean when I say 'people who genuinely don't have the time or resources to engage are not the people that this sign is targeting.'

I also don't think that 'engaging' must mean rushing out to a protest in the middle of a pandemic.

I do, however, think that choosing not to engage when you do have the resources---either in time, in money, or in mental resilience---to protest in some way or another (letter to your congressperson? $20 to the ACLU?) is not choosing a neutral middle ground. There's nothing "neutral" or "middle ground" about sitting back and let an arm of the government murder people with impunity. (Well, there is, but it's the middle ground between saving them on the one hand and going out to murder them yourself on the other.)

Choosing to do nothing to protest injustice---knowing that you could do something and then choosing not to do it---is exactly what 'silence=violence' is about.

Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: downer on June 28, 2020, 05:54:31 AM
I'm against injustice. It's clear the protests have highlighted injustices.

However, there are many injustices in the world, and we all choose what to put our energies into. It's good to be involved. But I don't feel any obligation to join the current protests.

Part of it is that I'm pretty resistant to jumping on the latest bandwagon. I also often feel that it makes little difference to join the well-attended protests and donate to causes that are already getting plenty of money, when I could be contributing to other causes where my efforts will make more difference.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Treehugger on June 28, 2020, 06:03:13 AM
Ah, I think we're getting confused by absolutes. I don't at all agree with the statement 'If you aren't wholeheartedly actively for us 100% of the time that means you are a bigot.' I agree with you that this is going way too far.  If you, because of your past experiences, cannot bring yourself to engage with this, that's cool. You look after yourself first. You are the people I mean when I say 'people who genuinely don't have the time or resources to engage are not the people that this sign is targeting.'

I also don't think that 'engaging' must mean rushing out to a protest in the middle of a pandemic.

I do, however, think that choosing not to engage when you do have the resources---either in time, in money, or in mental resilience---to protest in some way or another (letter to your congressperson? $20 to the ACLU?) is not choosing a neutral middle ground. There's nothing "neutral" or "middle ground" about sitting back and let an arm of the government murder people with impunity. (Well, there is, but it's the middle ground between saving them on the one hand and going out to murder them yourself on the other.)

Choosing to do nothing to protest injustice---knowing that you could do something and then choosing not to do it---is exactly what 'silence=violence' is about.

Well, if it makes you feel better, I am actively contributing to The Bail Project. One reason I chose that is because it is ostensibly not race-based, but purely injustice-based.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 28, 2020, 06:53:48 AM
Ah, I think we're getting confused by absolutes. I don't at all agree with the statement 'If you aren't wholeheartedly actively for us 100% of the time that means you are a bigot.' I agree with you that this is going way too far.  If you, because of your past experiences, cannot bring yourself to engage with this, that's cool. You look after yourself first. You are the people I mean when I say 'people who genuinely don't have the time or resources to engage are not the people that this sign is targeting.'

I also don't think that 'engaging' must mean rushing out to a protest in the middle of a pandemic.

I do, however, think that choosing not to engage when you do have the resources---either in time, in money, or in mental resilience---to protest in some way or another (letter to your congressperson? $20 to the ACLU?) is not choosing a neutral middle ground. There's nothing "neutral" or "middle ground" about sitting back and let an arm of the government murder people with impunity. (Well, there is, but it's the middle ground between saving them on the one hand and going out to murder them yourself on the other.)


This illustrates exactly why many people choose not to "engage".
"an arm of the government " is allowed to "murder people with impunity"; SEROIUSLY??????

The officers involved in this incident have been charged with criminal offences. Active duty military personel involved in the killing of civilians are charged with criminal offences.

There is no member of an "arm of the government " who is allowed to "murder people with impunity".

Academics are (or at least were) the people society counts on to examine issues deeply and consider all of the nuance to arrive at rational, if necessarily complex, inteprpretations. That kind of breathtaking hyperbole is the antithesis of what is expected of an academic, and the more academics talk that way the more understandable that members of the public dismiss ramblings from the ivory tower out of hand.

Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: ergative on June 28, 2020, 07:24:52 AM
Well, Brett Hankison, John Mattingly, and Myles Cosgrove still haven't been charged with anything. (https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html) And Eddie Gallagher was pardoned (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/27/eddie-gallagher-trump-navy-seal-iraq). And no charges were ever brought against Daniel Pantaleo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Eric_Garner).  I don't really think my statement was hyperbolic.

I agree that as an academic, it's on us to "examine issues deeply and consider all of the nuances to arrive at a rational, if necessarily complex interpretation." But 'How dare you be so hyperbolic! Just for that I'm out of here!' doesn't sound like that.

If you don't want to engage I can't make you. But I'll never approve of it, and I'm not going to accept any responsibility for 'look what you made me do'.

Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: theblackbox on June 28, 2020, 07:29:45 AM
I will keep my response brief.

A good example of sincere, research backed reform to reduce police brutality, with a quick way to see how many of these policies are already enacted in your city and a way to contact your mayor to encourage them to enact them:
https://8cantwait.org/ (https://8cantwait.org/)

The definition of white supremacy is: "the belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society." If you are not against this concept, it means you are neutral toward or endorse the idea that whites are superior and should dominate. Such reduction of human dignity of other people based on the color of their skin is repugnant, and I would not want any educational system I am a part of to tolerate such people among their faculty.

Increased gun control would do a lot of good on many fronts in this country. So would increasing police education requirements. There are abundant resources from other countries on how to take these steps, and we would be wise to work on them.

Anyone more offended by being encouraged to read a book than they are by the fact that Breonna Taylor's murderer has yet to be charged should sincerely reflect on the time and energy they have used to express outrage toward reading lists. I agree we need to have space for civil, rational conversation in academia, especially on topics that may otherwise seem one-sided in the court of public opinion; those suggestions must come from sincere curiosity and openness to the search for real truth, not a spiteful place that tries to diminish the murders and violence against a group of people.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: writingprof on June 28, 2020, 08:56:56 AM
Increased gun control would do a lot of good on many fronts in this country.

Should police have entered CHAZ (CHOP? CHODE?) to stop the illegal distribution of semiautomatic rifles, which was caught on video and can be easily viewed online?  Why or why not?
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 28, 2020, 09:27:46 AM

The definition of white supremacy is: "the belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society." If you are not against this concept, it means you are neutral toward or endorse the idea that whites are superior and should dominate.


I have never actually met anyone who claimed that.
And in our current climate, it's not about whether people are against white supremacy, but to what lengths they will go to claim that they are against it.

Quote
Such reduction of human dignity of other people based on the color of their skin is repugnant, and I would not want any educational system I am a part of to tolerate such people among their faculty.

Absolutely. Which is why blaming "whiteness" for all kinds of evil is as repugnant as blaming "blackness" (or any other ethnic distinction). Unfortunately, the education system does in fact tolerate such people among their faculty.




Quote
Increased gun control would do a lot of good on many fronts in this country. So would increasing police education requirements. There are abundant resources from other countries on how to take these steps, and we would be wise to work on them.

I would guess a majority of the population would agree with this.

Quote
 
Anyone more offended by being encouraged to read a book than they are by the fact that Breonna Taylor's murderer has yet to be charged should sincerely reflect on the time and energy they have used to express outrage toward reading lists. I agree we need to have space for civil, rational conversation in academia, especially on topics that may otherwise seem one-sided in the court of public opinion; those suggestions must come from sincere curiosity and openness to the search for real truth, not a spiteful place that tries to diminish the murders and violence against a group of people.

In a lot of these discussions, murders and violence are diminished when they are perpetrated by members of the same group of people as the victim. The number of people killed by gangs is astronomically bigger than the number killed by police, but that doesn't cause riots in the streets.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 28, 2020, 09:38:06 AM

The definition of white supremacy is: "the belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society." If you are not against this concept, it means you are neutral toward or endorse the idea that whites are superior and should dominate.


I have never actually met anyone who claimed that.


It's not what you, the white guy,  say you believe that implicates you. It's what you won't say but know in your heart you believe, or else it's what you truly believe about race that you don't know you believe that comes out in micro aggressions. Or it's....stay tuned. I'll update as things develop.
Maybe they could get white supremacist sniffing hounds.
I actually feel sorry for these folks who are who are fixating on this.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Treehugger on June 28, 2020, 09:43:54 AM
The definition of white supremacy is: "the belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society." If you are not against this concept, it means you are neutral toward or endorse the idea that whites are superior and should dominate.

Look, I am pretty sure no one here believes whites are inherently superior to other races or believes that it is OK to hold this view. But this does not actually reflect the current (and, in my book, unfortunate) usage of  the phrase “white supremacist.” If you have been paying attention, you will have noticed that now a “white supremacist” essentially is any white person who has any role no matter how peripheral is helping a supposedly underlying and all-encompassing system of white privilege. In other words, any white person.

My husband, who has sincerely worked to increase diversity in STEM and most certainly does not believe “whites are a superior race“ was called a white supremacist in the literature that circulate with the #shutdownSTEM movement. He asked why and was told that some computer scientists have made software tools (like facial recognition) that have been used by police departments against blacks. So, if you follow this “logic,” he is a “white supremacist” because he is white and a computer scientist. Wow! To his credit, he wasn’t upset by this, but kept on being his typical understanding self, always ready to listen. But I was pretty  pissed off on his behalf. I have made the decision that I will not be joining in any movement that relies on racial slurs (let’s call a spade a spade) or relies on guilt by association (like all good witch-hunting groups).

I can come up with many, many more examples of what “white supremacy” really “means” now, but if you are honest, you will spare me the effort.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 28, 2020, 11:45:24 AM
I will keep my response brief.

A good example of sincere, research backed reform to reduce police brutality, with a quick way to see how many of these policies are already enacted in your city and a way to contact your mayor to encourage them to enact them:
https://8cantwait.org/ (https://8cantwait.org/)

The definition of white supremacy is: "the belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society." If you are not against this concept, it means you are neutral toward or endorse the idea that whites are superior and should dominate. Such reduction of human dignity of other people based on the color of their skin is repugnant, and I would not want any educational system I am a part of to tolerate such people among their faculty.

Increased gun control would do a lot of good on many fronts in this country. So would increasing police education requirements. There are abundant resources from other countries on how to take these steps, and we would be wise to work on them.

Anyone more offended by being encouraged to read a book than they are by the fact that Breonna Taylor's murderer has yet to be charged should sincerely reflect on the time and energy they have used to express outrage toward reading lists. I agree we need to have space for civil, rational conversation in academia, especially on topics that may otherwise seem one-sided in the court of public opinion; those suggestions must come from sincere curiosity and openness to the search for real truth, not a spiteful place that tries to diminish the murders and violence against a group of people.

This. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 28, 2020, 05:34:08 PM
Whomever will dominate tomorrow is something for us to speculate about. There are black people, Korean people, female people, Chinese people, gay people, male whiteys in my classrooms who would love to dominate or outdo me someday soon. I'm still running hard, but they may do it. When it happens, I'm gonna say I helped.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 28, 2020, 05:40:21 PM
Whomever will dominate tomorrow is something for us to speculate about. There are black people, Korean people, female people, Chinese people, gay people, male whiteys in my classrooms who would love to dominate or outdo me someday soon. I'm still running hard, but they may do it. When it happens, I'm gonna say I helped.
Interesting that you think of it in terms of “domination.”  I think many people would be happy with equal treatment and a peaceful coexistence. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 28, 2020, 06:20:11 PM
Whomever will dominate tomorrow is something for us to speculate about. There are black people, Korean people, female people, Chinese people, gay people, male whiteys in my classrooms who would love to dominate or outdo me someday soon. I'm still running hard, but they may do it. When it happens, I'm gonna say I helped.
Interesting that you think of it in terms of “domination.”  I think many people would be happy with equal treatment and a peaceful coexistence.

Actually I think it gets dull quickly to think of competition too much but you and bento are railing about domination, so I thought I'd stay on topic. And it's true, there can be a time when one acknowledges the student has surpassed the professor. That is win-win.

My students are happy with my treatment. I am an adjunct. I could be replaced with a minimum of hassle. Kindly stop accusing me.

Your response was quite inane in my opinion.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 28, 2020, 07:56:01 PM
Whomever will dominate tomorrow is something for us to speculate about. There are black people, Korean people, female people, Chinese people, gay people, male whiteys in my classrooms who would love to dominate or outdo me someday soon. I'm still running hard, but they may do it. When it happens, I'm gonna say I helped.
Interesting that you think of it in terms of “domination.”  I think many people would be happy with equal treatment and a peaceful coexistence.

Actually I think it gets dull quickly to think of competition too much but you and bento are railing about domination, so I thought I'd stay on topic. And it's true, there can be a time when one acknowledges the student has surpassed the professor. That is win-win.

My students are happy with my treatment. I am an adjunct. I could be replaced with a minimum of hassle. Kindly stop accusing me.

Your response was quite inane in my opinion.

It is the response you’ve been wanting all along.  It would please you to be called a racist or to be accused of expressing racist comments on this board.  I’ve said nothing about domination; I simply commented on the way the word is being used in this context. 
It is all gaslighting on your part, really.  It is so tedious.  It is so old, so boring.  You wanted to vent, so you did. 
Your rhetoric is not new.  You are speaking into a space that is safe for you; academics value free expression too much to call you a racist for making racist statements.  In this way, your cowardice is also old and tedious.  But you want to be persecuted for feeling and saying these things.  So you keep making inflammatory and provocative statements. 
You lack the conviction and backbone to stand up for your own convictions.  So someone else has to kick you in the groin.  It’s so damn old.  And it’s so very much about you. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mamselle on June 28, 2020, 09:03:13 PM
It's threads like this when I miss The Fiona....

M.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on June 28, 2020, 09:57:44 PM
It's threads like this when I miss The Fiona....

M.

It's was just getting interesting. Shelby Steele: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMpQBWH-RwA

And it’s so very much about you. 

All purpose lame put down. It would be less about me if you commented on the discussions linked instead of about me. Yes, I suppose I can tend to post provocatively. I'm not always crazy about the culture of academia, it's true.

Baldwinschild, why don't you tell us what you think of what they black conservative scholars have been saying, if and when you get the urge? You have something interesting to say, I'll bet.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 28, 2020, 10:32:56 PM
It's threads like this when I miss The Fiona....

M.

It's was just getting interesting. Shelby Steele: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMpQBWH-RwA

And it’s so very much about you. 

All purpose lame put down. It would be less about me if you commented on the discussions linked instead of about me. Yes, I suppose I can tend to post provocatively. I'm not always crazy about the culture of academia, it's true.

Baldwinschild, why don't you tell us what you think of what they black conservative scholars have been saying, if and when you get the urge? You have something interesting to say, I'll bet.
I don’t have anything to say about they are saying. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Ancient Fellow on June 29, 2020, 02:51:13 AM
I don’t have anything to say about they are saying.

If you don't want to engage I can't make you.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Descartes on June 29, 2020, 11:12:30 AM
It's threads like this when I miss The Fiona....

M.

You do?

Why, so she could smugly come into the conversation, assert dominance by virtue of the opposite side's typo or misuse of phrase, and then make a pithy exit?

I don't wish her ill and I hope she's not dead or anything; I hope she's not here just because she doesn't want to be.

But I don't miss her.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 29, 2020, 12:48:22 PM
I don’t have anything to say about they are saying.

If you don't want to engage I can't make you.
I think shutting up until you have a thought worth sharing, until you’ve actually thought about something, can be a good thing.  Also, sometimes I just don’t have an opinion. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mamselle on June 29, 2020, 01:29:18 PM
It's threads like this when I miss The Fiona....

M.

You do?

Why, so she could smugly come into the conversation, assert dominance by virtue of the opposite side's typo or misuse of phrase, and then make a pithy exit?

I don't wish her ill and I hope she's not dead or anything; I hope she's not here just because she doesn't want to be.

But I don't miss her.

I've wondered if she's still with us on this earth, especially after (finally) being able to get back onto the Old Forum and seeing a post of hers near the end of a thread that noted she was in her second century of observing life on earth, or something like that.

Her ability to make a pithy remark and step away was also known as "thread-killing," and sometimes it seems like putting a thread out of its misery might still be a good idea....

De gustibus non disputandum.

(But then, most of the disputandum on these threads is about gustibus, so maybe that's no help, either...)

M
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 29, 2020, 06:08:22 PM
It's threads like this when I miss The Fiona....

M.

You do?

Why, so she could smugly come into the conversation, assert dominance by virtue of the opposite side's typo or misuse of phrase, and then make a pithy exit?

I don't wish her ill and I hope she's not dead or anything; I hope she's not here just because she doesn't want to be.

But I don't miss her.

I've wondered if she's still with us on this earth, especially after (finally) being able to get back onto the Old Forum and seeing a post of hers near the end of a thread that noted she was in her second century of observing life on earth, or something like that.

Her ability to make a pithy remark and step away was also known as "thread-killing," and sometimes it seems like putting a thread out of its misery might still be a good idea....

De gustibus non disputandum.

(But then, most of the disputandum on these threads is about gustibus, so maybe that's no help, either...)

M

You throw a mean bucket of ice-cold water yourself, you know. 
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: theblackbox on June 29, 2020, 06:44:22 PM
Quote
But if you ask them 'OK, now that you believe we're thinking what do you want us to do?' And they don't have an answer except more intense outrage.
There is some discussion I admit I do not have the energy to pursue in this forum, but I really did initially want to address this part of mahagony's opening point of this thread, and did so at the start of my post:
I will keep my response brief.

A good example of sincere, research backed reform to reduce police brutality, with a quick way to see how many of these policies are already enacted in your city and a way to contact your mayor to encourage them to enact them:
https://8cantwait.org/ (https://8cantwait.org/)
I am admittedly saddened no one responded to this part. Goes to show I should've stuck with my intention to be brief and only comment this first paragraph :) I do hope in the midst of the sparring, we can look for reform opportunities that are research based.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 29, 2020, 08:30:33 PM
Quote
But if you ask them 'OK, now that you believe we're thinking what do you want us to do?' And they don't have an answer except more intense outrage.
There is some discussion I admit I do not have the energy to pursue in this forum, but I really did initially want to address this part of mahagony's opening point of this thread, and did so at the start of my post:
I will keep my response brief.

A good example of sincere, research backed reform to reduce police brutality, with a quick way to see how many of these policies are already enacted in your city and a way to contact your mayor to encourage them to enact them:
https://8cantwait.org/ (https://8cantwait.org/)
I am admittedly saddened no one responded to this part. Goes to show I should've stuck with my intention to be brief and only comment this first paragraph :) I do hope in the midst of the sparring, we can look for reform opportunities that are research based.
What I find frustrating about threads like this one:

 I have many thoughts about the way my white colleagues are handling the protests and about the way they handle race-related issues in general.  I sit here and watch the flurry of email activity.  I just said “No, but thank you” today to the sixth request from some group putting together yet another diversity workshop.  I don’t know how to handle these issues, I don’t know what to say to workshop attendees about race or the protests.  I know what I feel, but I don’t know how much of what I feel should be imposed on my white colleagues.  I do not know how to navigate this for others.  I want to respect their rights to think freely and independently, even if I disagree with their viewpoints. 

So, here, on this board, where I come to talk to fellow academics (I read more than I talk), I am not saying anything.  I’m not accusing anyone of being racist or telling anyone to read a book.  I’m not starting a thread about racism in academia.  But someone else opened the discussion, quite forcefully and with a complete lack of grace.  And I am engaging because this space belongs to me as well, and I found those statements problematic.  And when you write them in this space, I have either to ignore them or speak back.  This is why I called it “gaslighting.”   This is why I called them “provocative.”  In this space, no one was holding the OP’s feet to the fire, no one was calling the OP out for not being tolerant.  We were talking about other things. 

I am saying I don’t know what the answer is for someone else.  That is why I haven’t started a thread in which I tell you what I think you should or should not be doing.  I am making a decision to not tell white people what I think they should be doing.  But the OP made a decision to initiate a discussion about this issue in a space we share.  The OP is forcing the moment to a crisis when he could have chosen to initiate a thoughtful and measured discussion.  The OP brought this to this board.  And I wanted to ignore it, but it is racial hate-speech.  That is what it is.  It is vile.  And if you, OP, have any questions about what makes it vile, remove George Floyd from the picture and insert someone you love.  Then replay those sentences you wrote about “one unnecessary killing.”  And ask yourself if that needed to be said.  Ask yourself if anything in this thread makes you feel better about yourself or the world. 

There was silence, and the OP spoke into it.  No black person in this space made you do that.  And yet here we are.  You could have accepted the silence, the tolerance, the lack of judgment, that was being offered to you on this board. 





Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: theblackbox on June 29, 2020, 11:49:39 PM
Baldwinschild, just for clarity, I hope you know I was not trying to insinuate that your responses should've focused on 8 can't wait or avoided the conflict within the thread. I'm biracial and much of what you've said resonates with my experiences.

I was referring to OP and the others who seem to agree with the opening stances and suggest there's a lot of misguided/misdirected emotion and no thoughtful direction for improving the current situation. I reject that fundamental premise and offered a clear example of productive, research-based change, and it was ignored. Put me down as disappointed but not surprised that it was a higher priority to those folks to insist white supremacy doesn't really exist and attempting to address it is witch-hunting and slurring all white people.

For the record, I don't go around accusing people of being white supremacists, and I have known people who absolutely believe whites historically conquered and enslaved others because they are superior. I've met them in academia as well as my personal life. I'm not interested in though policing or witchhunting; I hope the faculty at my institution will come together in an interest of increased justice to properly reprimand those few faculty espousing "whites deserve power more than the other races" beliefs and not fragment over suspicion of malice without significant evidemce of such. And with that, I'll exit stage right.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 30, 2020, 04:39:22 AM
Quote
But if you ask them 'OK, now that you believe we're thinking what do you want us to do?' And they don't have an answer except more intense outrage.
There is some discussion I admit I do not have the energy to pursue in this forum, but I really did initially want to address this part of mahagony's opening point of this thread, and did so at the start of my post:
I will keep my response brief.

A good example of sincere, research backed reform to reduce police brutality, with a quick way to see how many of these policies are already enacted in your city and a way to contact your mayor to encourage them to enact them:
https://8cantwait.org/ (https://8cantwait.org/)
I am admittedly saddened no one responded to this part. Goes to show I should've stuck with my intention to be brief and only comment this first paragraph :) I do hope in the midst of the sparring, we can look for reform opportunities that are research based.

I looked at the 8cantwait link. Since I'm in Canada, it isn't directly relevant, but obviously the principles apply broadly.

Part of the problem that I see is the information that is left out; one specific area of information that is omitted in the "research basis" is how the crime rate, including shootings of police, were affected by these policies. Clearly, if police violence is a cause of community violence, then restricting use of police force should result in a decrease in crime. On the other hand, if restrictions on police result in an increase in crime, so that a decrease in violence by police is accompanied by an increase in violence by criminals, then it's not a clear win for the community.

I wish the data were more comprehensive in this way becuase then more useful conclusions could be drawn.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: ergative on June 30, 2020, 06:23:31 AM
Quote
But if you ask them 'OK, now that you believe we're thinking what do you want us to do?' And they don't have an answer except more intense outrage.
There is some discussion I admit I do not have the energy to pursue in this forum, but I really did initially want to address this part of mahagony's opening point of this thread, and did so at the start of my post:
I will keep my response brief.

A good example of sincere, research backed reform to reduce police brutality, with a quick way to see how many of these policies are already enacted in your city and a way to contact your mayor to encourage them to enact them:
https://8cantwait.org/ (https://8cantwait.org/)
I am admittedly saddened no one responded to this part. Goes to show I should've stuck with my intention to be brief and only comment this first paragraph :) I do hope in the midst of the sparring, we can look for reform opportunities that are research based.

I looked at the 8cantwait link. Since I'm in Canada, it isn't directly relevant, but obviously the principles apply broadly.

Part of the problem that I see is the information that is left out; one specific area of information that is omitted in the "research basis" is how the crime rate, including shootings of police, were affected by these policies. Clearly, if police violence is a cause of community violence, then restricting use of police force should result in a decrease in crime. On the other hand, if restrictions on police result in an increase in crime, so that a decrease in violence by police is accompanied by an increase in violence by criminals, then it's not a clear win for the community.

I wish the data were more comprehensive in this way becuase then more useful conclusions could be drawn.

Camden reformed its police and violent crime went down. (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-10/after-police-reform-crime-falls-in-camden-new-jersey) And the  Police Use of Force Project  (http://useofforceproject.org/#analysis) found that police departments with more restrictive use-of-force policies kill fewer people, without any significant change crime not-caused by police.

A decrease in violence by the police accompanied by no change in violence by criminals is also a clear win for the community.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: marshwiggle on June 30, 2020, 06:55:13 AM

Camden reformed its police and violent crime went down. (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-10/after-police-reform-crime-falls-in-camden-new-jersey)

Thanks for that link. It was a good article because it was long enough to include a lot of nuance; some things have improved, some haven't, and normal statistical fluctuations mean that it will take a while for trends to be clearly established.

 
Quote
And the  Police Use of Force Project  (http://useofforceproject.org/#analysis) found that police departments with more restrictive use-of-force policies kill fewer people, without any significant change crime not-caused by police.

A decrease in violence by the police accompanied by no change in violence by criminals is also a clear win for the community.

Of course. And as the former article indicates, over time the data should make the overall effects more obvious.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: apl68 on June 30, 2020, 07:41:38 AM

 I have many thoughts about the way my white colleagues are handling the protests and about the way they handle race-related issues in general.  I sit here and watch the flurry of email activity.  I just said “No, but thank you” today to the sixth request from some group putting together yet another diversity workshop. 

There must be a LOT of pressure on minority faculty right now to help their departments put together diversity workshops and statements and such.  I imagine there's a good deal of cynicism among some regarding the motives of these efforts--accusations of empty "virtue signalling" and all that.  The impression I get is that most of it's a well-meant effort by majority white departments to make some kind of worthwhile response to the broader situation, using the standard academic methods of study, education, and writing stuff out. 

What's your impression of these efforts to create diversity workshops and such (Besides wishing you weren't being asked to take part in so many)?  What would you like to see your white colleagues doing right now?
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: Baldwinschild on June 30, 2020, 02:45:41 PM
Baldwinschild, just for clarity, I hope you know I was not trying to insinuate that your responses should've focused on 8 can't wait or avoided the conflict within the thread. I'm biracial and much of what you've said resonates with my experiences.

I was referring to OP and the others who seem to agree with the opening stances and suggest there's a lot of misguided/misdirected emotion and no thoughtful direction for improving the current situation. I reject that fundamental premise and offered a clear example of productive, research-based change, and it was ignored. Put me down as disappointed but not surprised that it was a higher priority to those folks to insist white supremacy doesn't really exist and attempting to address it is witch-hunting and slurring all white people.

For the record, I don't go around accusing people of being white supremacists, and I have known people who absolutely believe whites historically conquered and enslaved others because they are superior. I've met them in academia as well as my personal life. I'm not interested in though policing or witchhunting; I hope the faculty at my institution will come together in an interest of increased justice to properly reprimand those few faculty espousing "whites deserve power more than the other races" beliefs and not fragment over suspicion of malice without significant evidemce of such. And with that, I'll exit stage right.

No, not at all.  I did actually respond to your post the day you posted it, so I assumed you would know I wasn't directing this to you.  I was adding to you what you said.  I should have been clear about that.  My apologies.
Title: Re: Somebody Finally Says It
Post by: mahagonny on July 01, 2020, 05:23:50 AM
Back for what hopefully will be my last entry on this thread. I need to start figuring out how I'm going to be employed in the fall. I don't have the time/energy to continue working on these issues here, but I did get some opportunity to see the lay of the land and hear a few useful things. So, forward, either with a more informed approach, or, just as likely, not engaging at all and leaving the work to others. It's been interesting! Thanks for participating.