| Dyllyo said: This is STILL completely missing the mark. This literally dates back hundreds of years. 200 years of slavery, and segregation only JUST ended 50 years ago. I know you're young. And 50 years seems like the distant past. But some people remember the KKK hanging black people from trees and burning down black churches. And JUST BECAUSE SEGREGATION ENDED DOESN'T MEAN THAT RACISM JUST DISAPPEARED! I know this may seem crazy, but the ONLY way to truly fight this is admitting that racism still exists. We can't keep saying "oh those damn black people. They just keep complaining". Well, believe it or not, they're complaining for a reason...and we keep ignoring them. We have to stop and educate people. We need to treat each other justly. We can't keep assuming that pro-BLM means ANTI-cop! People are pissed because civilians are straight up getting murdered by cops, and no one is batting an eye. We're all equals. We need to act like it. The opposite of love is indifference. Not hate. |
I...honestly have no idea what this is responding to. If it's my OP, then I don't think I advocated any of the things that you're arguing against. If it's to someone in the thread, then could you perhaps tag them or at least reference their post so we know what/who you're talking about?
pokoko said:
Misleading? It's not misleading, it's a fact. In absolutely no way did I suggest that the percentages were higher or equal; in fact, I said "when you're on the bottom, you don't give a damn about percentages." You're going to have to explain to me how anything I said was misleading. Seriously, people are people, they're not ratios, they're not percentages. Someone in that 9.9% is every bit as important as someone in that 27.8% and vice versa. That need to label and sort people by secondary demographics is part of the problem. You're telling one group that they're a special case, they should get used to assistance, they should depend on it, that they need it more because of the color of their skin. It's ultimately condescending and debilitating. On the other hand, you're telling another group that they don't matter as much because more people with their skin color are successful. They're the chaff, they're the acceptable margin of loss. Yet another layer of division that just adds to the feelings of resentment. The goal should be to treat everyone the same, not to keep pushing in a wedge until the gulf is unspannable and you've got two sides looking at each other with suspicion and jealousy. It should be as simple as people who need help, not people who deserve help more because of percentages. |
I'll recant the misleading bit, because I misinterpreted what you were trying to say.
As for statistics, I think you misunderstand the purpose of them in my argument. No one is claiming that one person in the 9.9% is less or more important than someone in the 27.8%. Nor is it anywhere near condescending or debilitating, or to make people less than people. Quite honestly, I can't think of anyone who's used statistics to say that a group doesn't matter as much, with the possible exception of Bernie Sanders arguing that white people don't know what it's like to be poor. The point is not to argue that poor black people are more or less "important" than white people, it's about identifying what common problems are. If we're trying to figure out as a society what is causing these two groups to not get along very well (in this case, police and blacks), then statistics are a way of identifying where the issues might lie. When we find anomalies between a group and the rest of the population, that's an indicator that it might be a cause.
To my knowledge, and feel free to correct me if you have a counter example, almost no one I can think of argues that "a poor black person deserves your help more than a poor white person because he's black." I certainly haven't argued that on this thread, and I can't think of a single major organization or political pundit that would support that either.
