Have you studied why such things are in place? I mean I know why affirmative action in the beginning was in place?
There is very little genetic difference between chimps and humans, yet their seems to a larger difference in morphology and physiology, even psychologically. — Harry Hindu
It seems to me that any law or provision that favors some races to the exclusion of others is both racist and systemic. — NOS4A2
Again, systemic racism does not mean that all cops are racist or there are explicitly racist rules in place in government bureaucracies or that white people don't also suffer from the failings of certain systems. It does mean that certain systems function in a way (often despite explicit intent) to disfavour communities of colour. — Baden
Yes, their stories are important to remember, not to be projected into the present as if they are still happening today.The past sometimes leads to the present, hence is why civil rights movement existed. Hence is why we have modified laws in the Jim Crow era to make it equitable for all people in the present. However this doesn't change the fact that their stories are very important to remember. — Anaxagoras
Maybe, but I've experienced racism too. How do you know that the level of racism I've experienced isn't comparable to what you have experienced?My parents and grand-parents have passed on due to cancer and other ailments so I cannot show you anything. I've experienced racism myself. I've also experienced racial profiling. Of course the level of racism I've experienced is incomparable to what my parents and grand-parents experienced. — Anaxagoras
Here:Ok and where in my post have I done this? — Anaxagoras
Are you not using statistics of cops killing blacks as evidence that all cops are racist, or at least most of them are? If not, then what exactly are you trying to show when providing these stats, while at the same time ignoring the context of those stats - as in blacks committing crimes at a higher rate relative to their population than other racial groups.Not to mention who is killed more per capita (see:https://www.statista.com/chart/21872/map-of-police-violence-against-black-americans/). — Anaxagoras
While I understand why people may fall for folk wisdom on race, what makes me suspicious is when they cling to it after it's been debunked. — Baden
Excuse me? Who's focused on race again?Why wasn't anyone marching in the streets after just one white person was killed,
— Harry Hindu
You'd have to ask the Caucasian community. — Anaxagoras
Then BLM used the wrong name for their institution. It implies that All Black Lives Matter, but then you just explained that it doesn't mean that, so it is more of a political agenda than a movement to actually save black lives.Black Lives Matter specifically focuses on the issues regarding injustice in relation to police brutality and the issues concerning the lack of transparency in police conduct in relation to communities of color. — Anaxagoras
Here are some stats that put your stats into context, which is what you seem to have been trying to avoid for awhile now.While nearly twice as many white Americans were killed by on-duty officers than blacks, the Post’s updated data showed, black Americans remained 2.5 times as likely to die at the hands of police when adjusting for population. — Anaxagoras
It is BLM and people like you that are still focused on race because you keep using circular reasoning in assuming your conclusion (that cops are racist) to support your claim that the actions of cops are racist. — Harry Hindu
Again, systemic racism does not mean that all cops are racist — Baden
What makes me suspicious is when people cling to the idea that certain ideas have been debunked. Sure, humans have a wide range of varying features, but some features only occur with certain other features. Genetic drift and kinship selection are real, natural processes. — Harry Hindu
Then all you have done is show what systemic racism isn't when I've been asking for what it is. You haven't shown the existence of systemic racism at all. You've only shown that there are some bad apples in law enforcement. No one is disagreeing with that. What we are disagreeing on is your terminology.Again, systemic racism does not mean that all cops are racist — Baden
You mean to claim that you know what you are talking about but don't know what genetic drift and kin selection is? How do we know that the person in fdrake's video knows what they are talking about? What are their credentials on the subject? If the person never mentioned those terms that I did, then I wonder if they actually know what they are talking about.What ideas do you think have been falsely debunked? What does it have to do with race? And what is your evidence for it? So far, you give the impression of being an ignoramus with regards to the issue of genetics and "race". So, now is your chance to prove you're not. Lay out in scientific terms exactly what you are trying to say. If you can't or won't, we'll be justified in drawing the conclusion you have no idea what you are talking about. — Baden
Then all you have done is show what systemic racism isn't when I've been asking for what it is. — Harry Hindu
You mean to claim that you know what you are talking about but don't know what genetic drift and kin selection is? How do we know that the person in fdrake's video knows what they are talking about? What are their credentials on the subject? If the person never mentioned those terms that I did, then I wonder if they actually know what they are talking about. — Harry Hindu
And it still stands that it is people like you that are playing the race card, by assuming that every instance of blacks being killed by cops is an instance of racism. — Harry Hindu
You didn't have a problem posting a link to fdrake's post with the videos, but you can't seem to do the same thing when it comes to your definition of "systemic racism". Why are you being so evasive?Wrong again, I gave an explanation of it earlier in the thread. If you were interested in reading instead of.. whatever it is you are doing here, you'd know that. And if you don't know what systemic racism is now, you must not want to know. — Baden
Your objection was to disqualify the existence of systemic racism as put forth by Anaxagoras in their post that you "liked". If not all cops are racist, then why did you "like" Anaxagoras's post that had a link showing the rate at which cops kill blacks vs whites, as if that shows systemic racism in law enforcement? Such statistics don't show racism, so then why like posts that have links showing such statistics? :roll: I'm waiting on your definition of "systemic racism". Did Rubin define it properly in the video I posted a link to? As Rubin attempted to define each instance of systemic racism, Larry Elder debunked each one.I literally just dealt with this type of objection and pointed out it was a strawman in the last post. And yet you insist on repeating it. So, again, every instance of a black person being killed by cops does not have to be racist nor does every cop have to be racist for systemic racism to obtain. Please tattoo that on your forehead and look in the mirror before responding to any more of my posts. — Baden
I asked for the credentials of the person that made the videos in fdrake's post, but you failed to do that. If you have a degree, then I don't understand why you're using videos by someone who you can't verify as having a degree in lieu of your own explanation when you do have a degree.Yes, I know what they are and I think you know I do but are playing some silly game here. Apart from having a basic knowledge of these things, I studied genetics and evolution in university and have a related degree. Now stop the bluffing and man up. What is your scientific argument? Where are your references? What are your objections to what's in the video? You haven't even told us that. You come across as not having any substance behind your rhetoric. Prove me wrong. — Baden
You didn't have a problem posting a link to fdrake's post with the videos, but you can't seem to do the same thing when it comes to your definition of "systemic racism" — Harry Hindu
Systemic racism obtains when a system(s) function (regardless of explicit rules) to favour certain racial groups over others. It doesn't require overt individual racists (though it may protect and even reward them) nor does it necessarily require any conscious acts of racism at all (and obversely you could have conscious acts of racism in a system where no systemic racism exists, only rather than being performative of the system, they would be antithetical to it). Systems are culturally contextual, they're embedded in cultures and how they function depends on their relationship to the culture they're in. So, often it's what the system allows rather than what the system demands that's important. E.g. if you've got a justice or policing system embedded in a culture that's only recently emerged from the acceptance of explicitly institutionalised racism, you need extremely strong safeguards to avoid the continuance of implicit racism in whatever ostensibly non-racist institutions are substituted. Not having those safeguards in place means the explicit racism of before doesn't just disappear but finds footholds in the new institutions and festers there looking for opportunities to express itself.
Systemic racism occurs in all areas of social life, policing, housing, education etc. And again, it's not primarily about explicitly racist acts or explicitly racist policies or legislation but how things work in practice to disadvantage communities of color. Here's an example relating to housing.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/reports/2019/08/07/472617/systemic-inequality-displacement-exclusion-segregation/
"For much of the 20th century households of color were systematically excluded from federal homeownership programs, and government officials largely stood by as predatory lenders stripped them of wealth and stability.
In the decades preceding the Fair Housing Act, government policies led many white Americans to believe that residents of color were a threat to local property values. For example, real estate professionals across the country who sought to maximize profits by leveraging this fear convinced white homeowners that Black families were moving in nearby and offered to buy their homes at a discount. These “blockbusters” would then sell the properties to Black families—who had limited access to FHA loans or GI Bill benefits—at marked-up prices and interest rates. Moreover, these homes were often purchased on contracts, rather than traditional mortgages, allowing real estate professionals to evict Black families if they missed even one payment and then repeat the process with other Black families.57 During this period, in Chicago alone, more than 8 in 10 Black homes were purchased on contract rather than a standard mortgage, resulting in cumulative losses of up to $4 billion. Blockbusting and contract buying were just two of several discriminatory wealth-stripping practices that lawmakers permitted in the U.S. housing system."
Most likely, as with you, objections to the existence of systemic racism turn on a misunderstanding of what it is. As if it's just the type of claim that police are racist or police departments have racist policies. That's really not it. It's usually far subtler than that and, for being so, all the more pernicious. — Baden
Laws have been doing that for centuries and decades in the United States which is why there is an economic gap between whites and blacks. For example, the only reason why certain minority groups that migrate to the United States and are successful is because of the civil rights campaign. So not only minorities were fighting for equality they were still left behind and even after amendments and equitable provisions have passed, black Americans still found themselves behind.
This is ultimately why affirmative action existed to at least in part tried to close the gap by providing equitable opportunities that wasn’t fairly provided before..
We invented the blues; Europeans invented psychoanalysis. You invent what you need. — Albert Murray
I didn't see this as a definition because it is just as vague as your other explanations. You even admit at the end that it is subtle.It's on page one of the thread, so I expected you would find it yourself. In any case, here it is and it's in line with the standard definition. — Baden
Traveling around the globe, you quickly see that humans from different places look different. Nobody, for example, would mistake a Japanese for a Finn. The existence of visibly different human types is obvious, but there’s no bigger minefield in human biology than the question of race. Most biologists stay as far away from it as they can. A look at the history of science tells us why. From the beginning of modern biology, racial classification has gone hand in hand with racial prejudice. In his eighteenth-century classification of animals, Carl Linnaeus noted that Europeans are “governed by laws,” Asians “governed by opinions,” and Africans “governed by caprice.” In his superb book The Mismeasure of Man, Stephen Jay Gould documents the unholy connection between biologists and race in the last century.
In response to these distasteful episodes of racism, some scientists have overreacted, arguing that human races have no biological reality and are merely sociopolitical “constructs” that don’t merit scientific study. But to biologists, race—so long as it doesn’t apply to humans!—has always been a perfectly respectable term. Races (also called “subspecies” or “ecotypes”) are simply populations of a species that are both geographically separated and differ genetically in one or more traits. There are plenty of animal and plant races, including those mouse populations that differ only in coat color, sparrow populations that differ in size and song, and plant races that differ in the shape of their leaves.
Following this definition, Homo sapiens clearly does have races. And the fact that we do is just another indication that humans don’t differ from other evolved species.
The existence of different races in humans shows that our populations were geographically separated long enough to allow some genetic divergence to occur. But how much divergence, and does it fit with what the fossils indicate about our spread from Africa? And what kind of selection drove those differences? — Jerry Coyne
You said that not all cops are necessarily racist, yet you claim that systemic racism occurs in policing. How is that not a contradiction? Give concrete examples. — Harry Hindu
"African Americans are far more likely to be arrested for petty crimes." Here's just one study demonstrating that "a black person more than 3 1/2 times more likely to be arrested for possession [of marijuana] than a white person, even though rates of usage are similar."
https://www.aclu.org/report/tale-two-countries-racially-targeted-arrests-era-marijuana-reform — Baden
But that cannot be argued for those who never suffered through such policy, and I do not think it can be shown that everyone of that skin-color suffered through such policy. — NOS4A2
Are you not using statistics of cops killing blacks as evidence that all cops are racist, or at least most of them are? — Harry Hindu
How do you know that the level of racism I've experienced isn't comparable to what you have experienced? — Harry Hindu
Where are the stats showing that doctors are allowing more blacks to die in the emergency room than whites? — Harry Hindu
You are assuming your conclusion if you claim that everytime a black and white person come into conflict it has to be because of racism. — Harry Hindu
Then BLM used the wrong name for their institution. It implies that All Black Lives Matter, but then you just explained that it doesn't mean that, so it is more of a political agenda than a movement to actually save black lives. — Harry Hindu
What about though of us who suffer from the residual effects of such policies? — Anaxagoras
What about though of us who suffer from the residual effects of such policies?
Legalize marijuana. :cool: Problem solved."African Americans are far more likely to be arrested for petty crimes." Here's just one study demonstrating that "a black person more than 3 1/2 times more likely to be arrested for possession [of marijuana] than a white person, even though rates of usage are similar." — Baden
Then you're basically saying that humans are somehow special.There are no subspecies of humans, — Baden
Not if you read and watch Jerry Coyne, which you didn't address at all. I will also take issue with your interpretation of the content of the other links in just a moment, but let's look at what Coyne has defined race as:So, it's all there even in your own material. Race essentialism is bunk. — Baden
So there are two qualifiers here: being geographically isolated and differing genetically in one or more traits.Races (also called “subspecies” or “ecotypes”) are simply populations of a species that are both geographically separated and differ genetically in one or more traits. There are plenty of animal and plant races, including those mouse populations that differ only in coat color, sparrow populations that differ in size and song, and plant races that differ in the shape of their leaves.
Following this definition, Homo sapiens clearly does have races. And the fact that we do is just another indication that humans don’t differ from other evolved species. — Jerry Coyne
So while we used to be geographically isolated, we are no longer isolated like we used to be, but most of us still live our lives in our communities we were born in, mating with those within our community.Under that criterion, are there human races?
Yes. As we all know, there are morphologically different groups of people who live in different areas, though those differences are blurring due to recent innovations in transportation that have led to more admixture between human groups. — Jerry Coyne
You don't see that he is making the distinction between the socially used word and the biological one? They are two separate things. One is "folk" and the other a biological reality. One is racist/xenophobic while the other is scientific, and science isn't in the business of assigning values to those differences. Cultures do that."...it is important to distinguish between the word ‘race’ as it is socially used — say, the Black/African American, Native American, White, etc. racial categories used in the US census — from the biological sense, used to describe distinct populations within a species.
...the idea of an overarching ‘Black’ race utterly fails to capture the genetic diversity of African (or African-descended) peoples, irrespective of how we are now able to distinguish genetically related groups within the wider human population of Africa." — Baden
That's what a subspecies is."In some ways all non-Africans can be thought of as a subset of the genetic variation of Africans. Those humans who reside outside of Africa are simply a diversified branch of Africans." — Baden
You obviously didn't watch any of the videos. It was Rubin that was being educated by his guest, and I was hoping that they would educate you as well. The rest of your A and B example is ridiculous and it makes wonder if you actually received your degree as a surprise from a box of Froot Loops. The fact that you're using Wikipedia to try and debunk a well-respected evolutionary biologist says a lot as well.A: No, no, no, watch this Dave Rubin video, he explains everything! — Baden
That isn't what is being done here. As I have shown there is a distinction between the "folk" notion and the scientific one, so you're using a straw-man. The latter isn't supporting the other. It is simply making discoveries that might or might not be used to promote some already built-in assumptions about certain people. Science doesn't define distinctions as inferior or superior. Cultures do that.Anyone who mentions genetic drift as support for the idea of the folk notion of races... — Baden
The "Out of Africa" theory explains that a small group of Africans moved out of Africa (splintering off from the original population) and forms a new, geographically isolated group.The founder effect is a special case of genetic drift, occurring when a small group in a population splinters off from the original population and forms a new one. — Wikipedia
The rest of your A and B example is ridiculous and it makes wonder if you actually received your degree as a surprise from a box of Froot Loops. — Harry Hindu
There seems to be little evidence to suggest any racial disparity in police violence.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.