By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Where Police/African American Relations Went Wrong (A Working Explanation?)

Slimebeast said:
Goatseye said:

First of all, why would you say that? That is not how a civilized and functional society with proper judicial system should work. 

Then, he didn't mention white police officers. One of the biggest case of police brutality involves mostly black police officers that killed a handcuffed black guy inside of a police van.

And this issue is blown out of proportion by the news selling media.

People protest for the cops to stop murdering UNARMED people; it doesn't matter their past, if they didn't pull a gun or a blade to attack, they shouldn't be put down solely on the premise of "I feared for my life".

Don't move the goalposts.

I provided that quote to show you that you had the wrong impression about my stance on the issue of white cops versus blacks being shot. I wanted to correct your prejudice of me. It's a different discussion what the exact punishment for those crimes should be, and I may or may not have meant literally what I wrote there about killing the cops on the spot and may or may not have been in a slightly agitated state when I wrote that. But by showing you those quotes I was trying to show you the tone, where I'm leaning on this issue and hoping to change your erroneus view of me. But where is your acknowledgment of that? Instead, you just take the chance to try and "win".

Yes, he meant white police officers. He didn't refer to black officers whatsoever, they exist, the evil ones too, of course they do, but they were not relevant to his argument and dont fit into his picture of selling the notion of white racism.

I'm saddened about this dishonesty in discussions. You know he meant white racist cops versus black victims. Stop playing games. I'm so disappointed in you now.

What? You're offended because I said he didn't mention white officers? He really didn't and I told you that the issue of police brutality these days are not only about race. after all, you're inferring as to what he was trying to say.



Around the Network
Goatseye said:
Slimebeast said:

Don't move the goalposts.

I provided that quote to show you that you had the wrong impression about my stance on the issue of white cops versus blacks being shot. I wanted to correct your prejudice of me. It's a different discussion what the exact punishment for those crimes should be, and I may or may not have meant literally what I wrote there about killing the cops on the spot and may or may not have been in a slightly agitated state when I wrote that. But by showing you those quotes I was trying to show you the tone, where I'm leaning on this issue and hoping to change your erroneus view of me. But where is your acknowledgment of that? Instead, you just take the chance to try and "win".

Yes, he meant white police officers. He didn't refer to black officers whatsoever, they exist, the evil ones too, of course they do, but they were not relevant to his argument and dont fit into his picture of selling the notion of white racism.

I'm saddened about this dishonesty in discussions. You know he meant white racist cops versus black victims. Stop playing games. I'm so disappointed in you now.

What? You're offended because I said he didn't mention white officers? He really didn't and I told you that the issue of police brutality these days are not only about race. after all, you're inferring as to what he was trying to say.

This is hilarious. Such dodging, pretending you didn't understand.

I saw your true colors tonight. Let's drop this now.



MTZehvor said:
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.

That's slightly disingenuous because it's said all the time, simply by excluding the second part of your sentence.  Groups like the NAACP or figures like Al Sharpton certainly aren't looking out for everyone and they represent significant influence and attention.

Of course, there are statistical differences that should be understood.  Education needs to be more practical rather than just masterbation over top grade grubbers.  Black men, in general, rarely seem to be learning any skills at all from the previous generation, perhaps because of the high divorce rate.  Even high school dropouts who are familar with fields like masonry, construction, or carpentry can do well for themselves.  There should be more engagement and positive reinforcement for all students, not just those who can pull down A's on a report card.  As I said, I went to a poor school and I've seen many people who didn't really have a place there and they knew it.  They either wasted time until they got their piece of paper or they gave up and dropped out.  That does nothing for anyone.



pokoko said:
MTZehvor said:

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.

That's slightly disingenuous because it's said all the time, simply by excluding the second part of your sentence.  Groups like the NAACP or figures like Al Sharpton certainly aren't looking out for everyone and they represent significant influence and attention.

Of course, there are statistical differences that should be understood.  Education needs to be more practical rather than just masterbation over top grade grubbers.  Black men, in general, rarely seem to be learning any skills at all from the previous generation, perhaps because of the high divorce rate.  Even high school dropouts who are familar with fields like masonry, construction, or carpentry can do well for themselves.  There should be more engagement and positive reinforcement for all students, not just those who can pull down A's on a report card.  As I said, I went to a poor school and I've seen many people who didn't really have a place there and they knew it.  They either wasted time until they got their piece of paper or they gave up and dropped out.  That does nothing for anyone.

You can certainly make it disingenuous if you're actively trying to, but the same can be said for any statement that isn't provided with context. I could, for instance, take your previous statement that there are more white people than black people in poverty, not mention how much of the US population they make up, and convince people that poverty disproportionately affects white people. Ultimately, I think it's unfair to blame statistics for being abused; more than anything, it should be a reminder to us all that we should take statistics worth a grain of salt before we do the required research to make sure that the person giving statistics didn't leave anything out.

I agree that education is a problem and should be more practical, and realistically it'd be nice to see standarized testing take a hike. With that said, getting rid of a standard cirriculum does put pressure on the teachers to, well, actually come up with a coherent set of courses throughout school, and having volunteered at extremely poor public schools before, I'm not entirely convinced that they'd ever be able to do so. Public education is definitely the place to start, in some way or another, but figuring out how is difficult at best. Maybe give some kind of rewards to schools that can find kids jobs for the summers inbetween school years? That'd at least give them incentive to get kids some discernable skills and workplace experience, so that even if their grades fall through, they've got something of a past career to fall back on.



This isn't a modern issue, this issue has existed for ages. The relationship with the police and the black community in America has been toxic from the start.

The only difference today is smartphones and social media are here to record things in real time, so these things can no longer be swept under the rug so easily.

Anyone who grew up in the 90s will remember the Rodney King beating too, but today everyone has a phone that can record video now, and a platform in Facebook/Youtube to broadcast it to the world.