The difference in the rationale for both parties are well known, however, I would say that the left's rationale is more based on pure fantasy than practicality, similar to socialism and communism. You mention removing obstacles - what obstacles exactly? Tell me which obstacle stops a little black boy from becoming CEO/10k a day that an Asian/Mexican immigrant, for example, doesn't have to face? I used Asian/Mexican so we're dealing with 2 minorities here.

As for it raising awareness, lol. Those who were left-leaning are still left-leaning, those who were on the fence are now pissed off, those on the right are more racist than they have ever been.

All they achieved was take the conversation away from the real issues (culture) and make an enemy of the police, now the police won't want to touch a black neighbourhood with a 10 ft pole. I believe that black on black crime rates will skyrocket, and in a years time, people will ignore this correlation in the data because it doesn't fit their narrative.

It's made things much worse. Anyone with any idea of psychology knows that if you vilify one side of the isle, you're going to make enemies, not friends. Black people made a lot of enemies in the past month, unfortunately. Just look at the misc, a lot of pissed off white dudes here now that were not at all racist before. Meanwhile, it empowered a lot more black people to think they are victims, and vilify white people. The source of all great genocides and wars is one side vilifying the other, identifying them by their group rather than as an individual. The left's identity politics is gonna lead to some biblical ****show in the US when the right snaps, how people cannot see this, I do not know.

This is the bottom line. They possess no critical thinking skills. It's all emotional reasoning and fight or flight. It's actually pathetic that human beings still abide by their evolutionary, more primal brains in 2020. Maybe in a few thousand years evolution will catch up and the pendulum will swing. My guess is that we'll have wiped ourselves out by then and a future, more advanced civilization will someday study us and learn to think before acting.

1. The fact is, and what the left won't acknowledge is that different groups have different cultures. Culture plays the biggest part in how your collective group performs. Do you think it's a coincidence that Korean Americans perform so well at school, over-represented in STEM, comes from intact family. Do you genuinely believe that they have been given systemic advantage to have all these privileges? Or is it possible that their culture promotes this, whilst the black communities promote the opposite? If you agree that culture is the issue, then let's start there. I could concede for example that past racism has had a negative effect on black culture, but unless you address the actual problem (which is within the community itself) rather than pointing to external factors, it's a non-starter.

And yes I made the prescriptive statement because that is the root of the problem. It's like dealing with an alcoholic, first you got to get them to accept they ARE an alcoholic and that they need to stop drinking. Once they acknowledge the cause, we can go from there, what caused it, how to fix it, how to prevent it.

2. All citizens should get a fair trial but money is everything. Look, if you need healthcare, who gets the best health care? The ones with the money. Did O.J get a fair trial? He had a lot of privilege, and black! So that proves to me it's not a race thing, it's an income thing. It's important we get the facts straight here. When people shout racism, you vilify people and tell them their racists, the dialogue is immediately shut down. Why would I want dialogue with someone accusing me of being racist? Thats why I have NEVER used the racist card in my life, and I've been called all sorts "ching Chong", "go back to china", "watahhh", "small dink" etc etc. And I'm not even Chinese.

If you are willing to admit that it's an income inequality, I think 99% of people will agree to that. Then we can have a discussion on which parts of the system we want to eliminate income as a factor from. Judicial system? ok. healthcare? ok/ Education? ok. Housing? ok. etc.

3. As I said, the study is a bit like the gender wage gap study. It does NOT factor in class category which is the most obvious one. So it proves about as much as the gender wage gap study, i.e, nonsense. The left is the one making the claim of systemic racism in the judicial system, the onus is on them to provide the evidence, that is how it works.

I'm Asian and I believe that we are discriminated in Hollywood. I'm not asking Hollywood to provide the evidence for me. If I wanted to openly make that claim and state it as a matter of fact, I or someone of similar belief, will have to produce the study proving that.

1. I would agree that cultural issues exist, and these like you mentioned are likely to some degree due to historic factors that would play into that. That being said, societal and systemic issues that are unequal should still be fixed or at least acknowledged and addressed so they can be fixed. Change needs to happen on both sides of the fence.

2. Socionomic status would definitely be a large factor, one tied closely in with education. There are most certainly socioeconomic issues, anecdotal examples are comparing poor dude getting a decade for rape and brock turner getting like 9 months or something, due to their financial status. But, just cause one thing exists doesnt discredit another. Using a single case of OJ doesnt really refute my journal articles though or prove your point. Its a fun talking point like my brock turner example, but its still an anecdote. Id be willing to guess the literature suggests that rich people get lighter sentences and likely commit less crime compared to their lower status peers

3. The study from Michigan takes factors like income and education into its analysis

Additional measures of the defendants’ socioeconomic status are available for subsamples of defendants and are employed in supplementary analyses. The court records the county for all arrestees against whom charges are filed. County-level economic variables ðper capita income, unemployment rate, and poverty rateÞ along with the violent crime rate per 1,000 county residents were constructed by linking AOUSC county fields to data from the 2000 census and from the 2007–9 Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports. The court also records the defendant’s counsel type. This is a strong proxy for poverty because the government provides counsel only for indigent defendants

Lets suppose you're correct, and there is racial discrimination in sentencing. This would mean systemic racism isn't very consistent as statistically white people are more likely to be shot and killed by police than black/minority (even though black crime represents 53%). Does this mean policing isn't racist, just sentencing? Or is it because it's a multifaceted issue that has nothing to do with race?

Response to above as I get an error when I quote you.

1. This is the disconnect here. I believe its 95% culture and 5% genetics. The latter reason might sound racist but I do believe that higher testosterone males and a higher score in temperament aggression play a part in how much your overall group overall will commit a crime. The most obvious example of this is male/female. I do NOT believe, nor have I seen any proof of systemic and societal racism that is causing black people to commit murder at 10x the rate of white people.

I'll humour you, what do you propose we remove from the systemically racist system that we have right now so that there are fewer obstacles for black people to jump through? You won't find it because all of the problems can only be fixed by the black community. Going back to my alcoholic example, alcoholics can only fix themselves (short of putting a ban on alcohol).

2. Of course, anecdotal examples don't mean anything when measuring what applies to a whole group, that wasn't my intent. My intent was to state the obvious which is that richer people get lighter sentences with an obvious example, I haven't studied the data but I would be willing to bet my house that is the case, it's just common sense. And if anyone wants to take me up on that bet, I'd bother looking at the data. The point was just to illustrate that money buys leniency and the opposite is true too.

3.https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi...ntext=articles

This study still doesn't take into account the area/county. So you get a rough county, they will generally have rougher sentencing than a county with minimal crimes. That goes back to a class thing as black people occupy the rough counties, but is not exclusive to them.

Second, they found a 9% disparity in sentencing length, which by the way, is way more extreme of a disparity between men and women committing the same crime of the same class. That could be explained with a certain group i.e men, committing more crime, and therefore the judge is less sympathetic towards them than women. That bias is wrong but is natural. As I said, that disparity between men and women is far larger than black vs white, but the same reasoning probably applies. They, HOWEVER, found now disparity in guilty sentencing. Which means that black men aren't being put in prison more unjustly than white people, they just generally serve a 9% longer sentence.

Second - let's assume that blacks get an average of 7 more months length in a sentence. Do you really think this is the main issue? Do you really think this is the obstacle that is holding black people back from being successful? I feel like this is reaching. I mean, to get from A to B you have to commit A, and A happens to be a crime, which black people commit at 10x the rate, not just for petty crimes mind you, homicide too. This is a really weak argument because if this is the biggest case for racism that you can come up with, you're argument is fked, and it sets such a low bar. Let's assume that we removed those 7 months, you would still have black people committing crime at 10x the rate, committing homicide at 10x the rate, because these things are precursors to the sentencing systemic bias.

I say this is reaching because this would very much be a very similar argument to something like:
Right: "there is a rape epidemic within the Mexican community, Mexicans should stop raping their women".
Left: "that's because Mexicans get on average 7 more months in prison for rape than white people".

Remove the 7 months, you STILL have the rape epidemic, except the rapists/criminals are coming out 7 months earlier.

You're really focusing on the wrong stuff, 95% of the problem is cultural as I mentioned above and is the inconvenient truth, the racist thing to say, so we make up other problems. And the worst part is, you're not even a representation of what the BLM movement is asking for. BLM movement is asking for the destruction of the nuclear family and defunding of the police. Tearing down statues. Invading homes. Intimidating people in general. I literally cannot think of anything positive they have done or conveyed since they started and you support it.

It's so completely wrong. You're fighting the wrong fight. You're too busy trying to educate the guys trying to fix the 95% whilst BLM who is trying to fix the 5% but will cause 100% more damage (destruction of nuclear family and police defunding) is getting a pass. That is the issue, you've picked the wrong battle.

You're conflating more and more likely. Are more whites killed by police than blacks, yes. But why would you not compare per capita?


https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02601-9

The results paint a picture of definite disparity when it comes to race and police shootings. Although more white people are shot in total, people from minority ethnic groups are shot at higher rates by population. One paper published in August found that a black man is 2.5 times more likely than a white man to be killed by the police during his lifetime1. The difference, albeit smaller, is also there for women. But the authors did not make any conclusions regarding racial bias of police officers, in part because not everyone has an equal chance of coming into contact with the police. Crime rates and policing practices differ across communities, as do the historical legacies that influence them. Aggressive policing over time can increase local levels of violence and contact with the police, says Frank Edwards, a sociologist at Rutgers University in Newark, New Jersey, and an author on the paper. “This is inherently a multilevel problem,” he says. Researchers have used various approaches to try to determine the best benchmarks for the data, such as looking at the arrest rates where the shootings occurred or factoring in the context of encounters that end in a shooting. Did the suspect have a weapon? Were officers or another civilian being threatened? In a 2017 study3, for example, Nix determined that black people fatally shot by the police were twice as likely as white people to be unarmed. Those findings align with many studies published since 2015 suggesting that racial biases do influence police shootings.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

Victims were majority white (52%) but disproportionately black (32%) with a fatality rate 2.8 times higher among blacks than whites.. black victims were more likely to be unarmed (14.8%) than white (9.4%) or hispanic (5.8)

Is this a multifaceted issue, big time. There are lots of factors that affect crime and police interactions such as socioeconomic status, mental health issues, poor police training, impoverished communities, poor education etc etc. I cannot tell you how much implicit biases affect the police and subsequent encounters and shooting, but shootings generally are a very niche interaction between police and occur at a rate of roughly three a day.

And a single talking point from either side doesnt prove or disprove that racism exists within the police system. Im sure someone with an educational background in the field would come up with more than me or if i cared enough to spend days reading literature. But ones off the top of my head are stop and frisk in new york targeting minorities and not resulting in positive benefits as a practice. And traffic stops having racial bias during the day with more black motorists per capita being pulled over, but seems to even out after dark when its harder to see the driver. I dunno, maybe blacks tend to drive more recklessly during the day than whites and at night time they tend to drive safer, or maybe the driver is harder to identify at nighttime.

Like we have agreed upon, its a multifaceted and complicated issue, and im getting tired mate and rambling

People keep bringing up sh*t that happened in the 1960s and that was over 120 years ago. Come on now......

ill start with this oneI in no way shape or form represent BLM or some of the ridiculous positions members of that group have. My responses to this thread stemmed from the question of an example of systemic racism. This is me wanting to debate for fun and learn some new things from the conversation. Maybe produce some persuasive arguments. That being said, I strongly believe in equality of opportunity and would like to live in a society where everyone has equal opportunity and for it to be fair. Complete fairness is a pipe dream, so rather positive societal changes through policy change is the better goal most people should strive for and Id like to think generally where i place my moral framework.

Im pretty tired so my responses are going to be lack luster here

1. So you'd say 0 societal or systemic/historical issues occur which decrease the outcomes of black communities? My broad prescriptions to better society would be better healthcare and better education as those would help in the long run as better educated people commit less crime and have more opportunities for wealth. Not sure how you fix the cultural issues in the community such as high single motherhood rate, im sure fixing the 1/3 black men going to prison would help with that as well as meaningful job opportunities education and access to after school programs/ other **** to strengthen the family unit.

3. I think it does though. The white vs black counties had similar mean income (black community was slightly higher, roughly 500. Had similar rates of poverty and crime rate and then in their math models its factored to try and minimize these variables.

Men vs women, Im not sure if men need lighter sentences or women need harsher sentences. I think generally punishment vs rehabilitation, I'm going to favor rehabilitation over treating people like animals because you end up with institutionalized animals. I get your its natural argument but you're also making the same rational neo nazis use to justify racism.I think youre kinda straw maning me here cause im talking on a single issue rather the totality of the the problems in america that effect the black community

Honestly, I don't know much about those drugs to give you and educated response. All I know is that there's a disparity there.

Another great example of systemic racial inequality is policing. I'm sure everyone knows that the richer suburbs have better policing than the hood even though the hood has tremendously more criminal activity. Who lives in suburbs (mostly white people) and who lives in the hoods (blue-color minorities).

However, I also think it is vice versa. The quotas that universities have of filling spots with minorities regardless of their test scores is unfair to hard-working students that deserve the spots.

It seems to be a "pick-and-choose" situation.

I do not feel like BLM has a legitimate standing. What they're promoting and condoning is entitlement and taking advantage of the legal systems. They're making the problem worse by not making the communities responsible for fixing their issues.

I feel the same about Muslims (being a Muslim myself). The resolution of Muslim extremism has to be resolved from within the community. It cannot be resolved by outside forces, and certainly not by sympathizing with them by giving out free handouts in revised laws.

In that case, my bad. This was a BLM thread, I had incorrectly assumed your argument was in defense of the BLM movement.

1. I believe that historically systemic racism caused a culture for the black communities today that has put them on a hamster wheel of crime, victim mentality and failure. This culture specifically causes:

- Boys/men to grow up with fatherless homes. The single father home went up from before the civil rights act of 20% to 75% - that is huge and would be catastrophic for any other race. Which part of the culture can I point to with this? Oh I don't know, maybe the thousand hip hop songs on sex and fk bishes. The white community is heading down this road too btw, specially liberals, the blacks just got there first. First, the media influence the boys, then the boys influence each other and it's all downhill from there. It's similar to religion, we don't need it today because religion has influenced our ancestors who influenced our parents/society/us and now our society influences us.

- Thug culture. Tekashi69 ffs. Every hip hop song. Gangasta life, snitches get stitches. Again this is influenced by the media, the media has the power of wtf to promote to the public, I'm sure they bloody knew well what they were doing back then. I grew up with black people, not all of them, but a good portion of them had this chip on the shoulder to want to prove they're "tough". It actually shocked me when I moved from a 50% black neighbourhood to then a 1% black neighbourhood, I didn't know people were so different.

- The war on drugs. So much drugs got through to the US, how did the CIA not stop this? Who was going to be distributing these drugs at a local level exactly? The poor people of course. Who were the poor people? yea, black communities that were already influenced by the media to be thugs.

- You could say the cause was systemic. The fact that they were initially the poor communities to pick up the drugs, the massive push by the media to promote a new ****ty culture rather than the Christian culture they had previously. But that was historically, can't point to it now. Now is a different issue.

And oh, fixing the 1/3 men going to prison means those men stop committing the crime. You've only somewhat proven that they get 9% longer sentence, not that they wouldn't have gone to prison either way.

3. If the study factored for that, then I'll concede that black people might get longer sentences slightly by 9% due to implicit bias. Bias btw which is no-less caused by black people. You see, people's perspective of you is not really their fault, it's "your" fault for behaving in such a way that others have formed a bias of you. I mean why do we think black people are generally better athletes than whites? Because their group has behaved/been better athletes (at least in terms of sprinting and football/nba) to earn that bias. Similarly with the bias that they are thugs, when you're 13% of the population but commit 50% of the crime, that's what happens.

And I wasn't trying to strawman you. We're trying to find out WHAT is currently in the system that is acting as obstacle to black people succeeding in America. So far, the only one you have come up with, and I'd be willing to concede unless I find evidence that debunks your study otherwise, is black men being incarcerated 9% longer. Which would in no way, shape or form, help black men succeed collectively. The bar is just set too low there, it's not even a case of they get sent to prison more often, it's just that they get longer sentences meaning they DESERVE to go to prison.

Finally, on whether black men are killed more than white men per encounter.

The Stamford study and Harvard study came to the same conclusion:https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fr...es_figures.pdf

They are not. In fact, accounting for all of the variables, white men are more likely to be shot by the police per encounter. You can't compare it per capita, that would just be ridiculous, as black men are committing far more crime. And black men are also committing homicide at 10x the rate compared to white men, so it's not just petty crime like out for a jog and pulled over. So you can't argue that black men only have more registered crime because they get policed more because the homicide rate reflects the exact same correlation, and that isn't due to being policed more. It's a fact that black men are committing 10x more the crime, no getting around that.

I'll leave you some more stats, black men are 286x more likely to commit crime against an Asian vs vice versa. Now that is true racism in data.

This whole narrative of the black men being targeted by the police has been crazy and baseless to begin with. It again shows the low bar that has been set for them. Instead of the message going back to what I said earlier "stop committing so damm much crime", the message is "why are they getting policed so often?".

I'll leave you some anecdotal examples, I know they don't mean much in a collective assessment but when it happens so blatantly and is almost common sense, it almost feels like gaslighting when people say otherwise.

I lived in the south of London where the population was 50/50 black/white. When I was a skinny teenage kid I was mugged about 4 separate occasions. Can you guess the race for each of those 4 occasions? Sure it's anecdotal from me, but I can tell you from personal experience, it was not a coincidence and speaking to other kids at school, even my black friends, it was the same story. Indians love curry, its a stereotype, but it's true.

To bad the media will never air something with this much common sense

You actually answered your own question already:It's pretty hard to be successful, if you live in a neighbourhood or go to school, where you might get bullied or even threatened with weapons for doing well. If you have parents, who will not be able to talk to you about science and might think you are a little weird. If you grow up in an antiintellectual social circle, you will often have to make the choice beetween interpersonal relationships and success.
Therefore I agree, it's mostly culture and yes less police in certain neighbourhoods can have some bad consequences. But I also see them trying to do things, which help with culture as well for example by creating more positive rolemodels through representation in the media. (though they sometimes go too far there IMO)
There is also affirmative action, which in time will likely have a positive impact on those communities. (Though I am opposed to that stuff personally.)I agree with this, but I see it more as an unwelcome side effect of actual issues. And while the thing that is protested against (police brutaliry against blacks) seems to be not that much of an issue, there is still a lot of inequality, that will boil over again and again until the situation improves.

The biggest issue with the BLM movement, and I do not understand why anyone who is not an extreme left cannot see this, is that it basis its argument on a lie whilst at the same time vilifying the majority of the population. I mean people say Trump is divisive but BLM's divisiveness, outright racism, ridiculous mission statement is about 1000x worse. So if you are center or left and can't stand Trump's divisive behaviour, you should be blowing a gasket watching BLM, and yet so many still support them.

Tearing down statues, cancelling shows, calling everyone racist, "if you're silent you're racist", if you're not with us you're against us. Ironically, "all lives matter" is racist, when that is in fact a uniting statement. If someone said to me "hey man, sorry Asians are being targeted, all lives should be treated equally" - that is suppose to be a positive! It demonstrates perfectly how far left we've come, when a neutral, uniting statement is considered far right. An opposing statement to that would have been "black lives don't matter" or to a lesser degree "white lives matter" which is not opposing but combative.

The worst part is, not only is BLM divisive, focuses on the wrong issue, hateful and inciting hate from both sides BUT it's hurting their own communities because it distracts from the actual issue. Now the general thought by the people opposing them is to let them have their cake, look at CHAZ for example. "Go have your no police state, murder each other.". A washing your hands off them. It's like walking away from an alcoholic because they can't fix their problem without accepting the problem is themselves.

What do you mean by better policing? I've worked for two departments. One "hood" and one "richer suburb". The hood cops were better police officers in terms of reducing crime, catching criminals, etc. The rich suburb police officers were better police officers in terms of moving along homeless people and responding to calls that aren't of criminal nature - that's basically 80% of what we do, compared to being about 5% of what we did in the "hood" department. The rich suburb department gives the impression of better policing, but when there's actual violent crimes in progress, we kinda screw things up, they just don't happen enough for us to be stellar responding to them, whereas at the hood department, you literally couldn't pass training without being able to handle these calls yourself.

The hood department paid about $1000 a month less to start, and close to $25,000 less yearly to max out. The education incentive alone is about $700 more a month, on top of the other salary gains. The hood department did not have the public's support, and the rich suburb department does. Which is why people like me leave the hood department (I like thinking I'm a good police officer) and go to the rich suburb department, which pays better, easier less stressful work day, etc. This leads to lots of the qualified cops with degrees going to the suburbs for more pay and less work because why wouldn't you.

In the end, it's on the community. The low income community doesn't like the police, doesn't want to fund the police (sound familiar) and then gets an inferior product as a result, inferior officers because the "good" ones leave and the ones that get stuck there get disgruntled, stressed out, etc. The richer community supports the police, wants to fund the police, and gets a superior product - but that's their own doing, because the actual police services in terms of responding to emergency calls, like the public wants and should expect, is exceptionally better at the hood department.