The two candidates for presidential office have suspended their activities for the day in deference to the horrors of the Dallas shootings.There had been no thought of suspending campaigns based on the shootings of two black men alone.Perhaps there should not have been, but there is something bothersome about retaliation with police targeted being needed to indicate the enormity of the events.Meanwhile in Long Beach CA.A POLICEMAN CONVICTED OF MULTIPLE RAPES UNDER COVER OF OFFICE AND RELEASED UNDER $2,000,000 BAIL HAS COMMITTED SUICIDE.The confluence of events is a reminder that better evaluations of potential police needs to be done.The training phase of things may be too late.
The only group that may be content with the ruin of 12 shot officers,five dead.One dead retaliator(killed by a robotic device after declaring his hatred and intent to kill whites particularly cops)would be the NRA. More guns for everyone boys?
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
The Octogenarians 
Why would ‘the white man’ have a great interest in equalizing? For then his inherent power would be compromised. https://news.vice.com/article/iowa-congressman-steve-king-harriet-tubman-andrew-jackson-20-bill-racist-sexist
Well, justice will be the only way to trump the inequities, then maybe empathy and maybe, even, principle. Justice, however, we must not forget, is an ideal — which is why we have built societies, entire empires and civilizations, on law, order, and due process, attempts toward equality where human nature is distrait.
That police officer shot Philando Castile in a panic. The officer can be heard — as Castile limps to the side, soaking red through his shirt, dying — panicking in an altogether pathetic, dare I say, remorse. He repeats, “Fuck” between heavy, almost whimpering breaths, as Diamond Reynolds keeps her hands in sight and continues to address her boyfriend’s killer by “sir,” each gracious nicety stinging sour. Here, one is witnessing the exchange of social power. What did that officer see in Mr. Castile?
Something less than human is my guess. The shots a manifestation of his fear — fear of an unseen man. Because justice stands no chance in those moments of panic, because the life of Castile and Sterling, Martin, Brown and Garner has ended before justice has been received, it could almost be deemed futile. Retrospective. Retroactive. In the face of our nation’s nasty history, a history still playing, we must reverse these engrained inequalities, quickly, and categorically deny the reasoning that any of those men or their families or the black man walking the street right now, have seen justice. As GregoryS. iterated, the “underlying problems.” If we continue to placate our misery, to disembody ourselves from our reflection, to convince ourselves that “justice” will be done, we will have missed the point. Justice is constraint, dignity to each man. Justice comes before the shot, not after.
SusannaB, Daedal2207, GregoryS, and ThomasS are obviously skilled wordsmiths. All readers should with pleasure enjoy the stylistic skills with which these writers express their deep passions. I am addressing these serious issues with a focus on content, evidence that is reasoned in its presentation. To the degree that objective truths can be clarified we increase the probability that we can actually do that which betters the lives of the people these writers’ passions ought to serve. Part of my hypothesis is that the focus of their particular passions is hindering, not aiding us in the goals I believe we all wish to achieve (But it is possible too that variations in goal may be present).
ThomasS: “Why would ‘the white man’ have a great interest in equalizing? For then his inherent power would be compromised.”
This opinion assumes that the “white man” is as obsessed about race determining status and power as is the person who wrote it. This would be projection. I guess, in a psychic sense, such status power can exist in the minds of the subjugated who have a need to assign to others the power to dominate them. The psychiatrist(s) among us can tell us about that. Through nearly 80 years of interactions, my white friends, and the authors and the artists we have enjoyed, tended to use Victor Frankl’s concept of race, “There are only two races, the decent and the indecent.” Added to that is “achievement” as the basis on which to build their egos. Except when facing racists, race has not been, and is not a consideration.
The rest of ThomasS’s statement gives us the gift of beautiful, empathic writing. And she plays with the wonder of ideas such as – where indeed exists the locus of justice – before the shots are fired, or after? (Or is it omnipresent?). Love it! Thank you TS.
GregoryS provides as a response to my statement a quote of Albert Einstein’s: “Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.”
I agree. I suppose that this is intended to reduce my opinions to the status of prejudice, but it applies equally to his – and to all of our opinions. Therefore it tells us nothing at all about the issue at hand.
Daedal2207: “Sorry again Don, but the sources on which you rely are now among the knuckle draggers of science.”
U. Minnesota’s Study of Twins Reared Apart and many of its conclusions were published in the Jan 6 2012 edition of National Geographic. The following quote is to the point: Conclusions “ran counter to the prevailing belief of behaviorists that our brains were blank slates waiting to be inscribed by experience. More alarming to some, the suggestion that intelligence was linked to heredity evoked the disgraced theories of the eugenics movements of the early 20th century in England and the United States, which had promoted improvement of the collective gene pool through selective breeding.
“The far-left groups on campus were trying to get me fired,” Bouchard says.
The researchers also questioned how much parenting affects intelligence levels. When they compared identical twins raised in different families, like the Jim twins, with those raised in the same family, they found each pair’s IQ scores to be similar. It was as if it didn’t matter in which family the twins had been raised. That didn’t imply, Bouchard and his colleagues were quick to point out, that parents have no impact at all on their children. Without a loving and supportive environment, no child can reach his or her full potential, they said. But when it came to explaining why a particular group of children ended up with different IQ scores, 75 percent of the variation was due to genetics, not parenting.
Besides the Minnesota project, which ended in 2000, other studies have used twins research to examine all kinds of behaviors and attitudes. One investigation, for example, found that an identical twin with a criminal co-twin was more than 1.5 times as likely to break the law as a fraternal twin in the same situation, suggesting that genetic factors somehow set the stage for criminal behavior. Another study found that the strength of an individual’s religious fervor was significantly shaped by heredity, though one’s choice of affiliation—whether to become, say, a Methodist or a Roman Catholic—was not.
Wherever scientists looked, it seemed, they found the invisible hand of genetic influence helping to shape our lives.”
The only other source mentioned in my statement was the book “Coming Apart”. It too was published in January of 2012.
Is Daedal2207 saying that all this data has become meaningless in the last four years? Please clarify!
Daedal2207: “Physical anthropology now relies on genetics and DNA analysis and the findings on “race ” are as GS and I have presented them albeit anecdotally.”
I never mentioned a date when I suggested the importance of physical anthropology to support my hypotheses. I agree with the fact that genetics and DNA analysis and the findings on “race” (being non-existent) as GS had earlier stated. They do not conflict with what I had written. Why do you think they did?
Daedal2207: “Psychometrics is also vastly more sophisticated not only in techniques but in sensitivity to the classification of who is being tested and under what circumstances.”
More sophisticated than when? I didn’t mention any time period. I agree that it has increased sensitivity to classifications, but how does that alter the meaning of anything I had written?
There are changes in the world. Love it! Cell phones! Uber! Electric bicycles are terrific! But why does daedal2207 think that “The world is different” alters in any way anything I had written?
SusannaB has presented comments that are fun, learned, playful and imaginative with innuendos. She tells us that Socrates said, “True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing,”
I wonder about the context and (and did he really say it?). For the sake of humility and harmony with the scientific method, I prefer “We do not know how much we do not know.” “Nothing” just isn’t true. We clearly “know enough” to have survived this long as a species. The focus of this blog should be to “know enough” to survive as best we can well into the future.
In that service the request remains:
For the intellectual enlightenment of all our readers, please provide clear, reasoned evidence that the hypotheses I have provided (July 10, 7:33) are “unreasoned” and cannot reflect some very real possibilities.
You have referred many times to the Minnesota studies.2000 and even 2012 are in the stone age.The very concept of race is now shattered,thus my comment about who is being measured.Paleoanthropology is now genetic science. DNA does not lie.and the findings are new 6 months to a year and one half and continuing to cascade.Sources of information are American Scientist,Science,Genetics ,National Geographic even TV’s NOVA.Wikipedia is now permitted as a collegiate source.”Knowing enough to survive” could well be the focus of this blog but you need to “get with the program”.Articulateness is still an archaic measure of intelligence so if your attack on “wordsmiths”indicates a wariness of old measures of intellect…good.The new tools are turning old evidence into new “truths”.The moral and ethical principles adduced by SB,sT,GS,AT,and others do not rely on science but are clearly not countermanded by it.
For decades I have understood and agree completely with the statement that for the physical sciences “The very concept of race is now shattered” thus the people being “measured” are just individuals who display varying levels of aptitudes, not members of groups that we hereby agree do not exist (except in the imaginations and for the purposes of those who wish for “race” to exist. False belief generally, and false belief as to race specifically, are exactly what I am addressing.) I am perplexed as to why you think I have been saying something different. “Coming Apart” intentionally avoided racial factors in describing the social forces that are evolving primarily from the fact that we vary in aptitudes – and thereby evolve different (and often conflicting) social values. The fact that many wish for the imaginary “race” factor to exist creates real, not imaginary, problems for all of us. The “real” impact of this imaginary belief has divided us into tragically conflicting groups. The believers in the importance of “race” thus are the carriers of a significant disease that needs to be cured.
I did not attack “wordsmiths”. In fact, I admire such skills and stated so. But I know that style and content are often different and clarity of content is my focus (It is also true that sometimes style obscures the messages of content. This is something to be concerned about – in our own works and in that of others.) . It is true that moral principles are not necessarily “countermanded” by science. However, often they are. Science has rightly overturned many a religiously (or otherwise) ordained “moral” stance. When “what works” is given priority over “moral intent” I think that we are more likely to actually achieve the lesser degree of suffering that I hope we all desire.
Please be more specific when asking me (or others) “to get with the program”. Specifically why is “the program” (whatever that might be) better than what I have actually written?
Some science, then:
In today’s Times, “The science clearly shows that the first step in reducing your bias is recognizing that it exists,” said Dr. Lorie Fridell, an associate professor of criminology at the University of South Florida, who conducted a training program called Fair and Impartial Policing. “One approach,” the article reads, “that does not work well is traditional diversity training…which teaches officers about other cultures and how to deal with them but does not address implicit bias. Dr. Joshua Correll, at the University of Colorado, says that it backfires. He said: “Some interventions you think would work, like having officers try really hard not to use bias, not to think of race — well, in the split second in which they have to make a decision, all they think about is race: ‘Ah, he’s black,’ and there’s no time to correct it. They exhibit more stereotyping behavior, not less.”
Mr. Spencer, I’m afraid your “nearly 80 years of interactions with white friends, and the authors and artists [you] have enjoyed,” have been entirely dishonest. You see, there are races. The most dishonest statement any white person can make, and they often do, is that they are “blind” to race. It is not something to be blind toward!
Viktor Frankl, a holocaust survivor, has been taken out of context. He was speaking in the abstract in your citation. And that’s fair enough. But, actually, his life’s work centered on the notion of idealism; we must hold man up to the standards we value so that he may become what he is capable of becoming. So a more apt quotation would be: “‘When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.” Dr. Frankl knew all too personally the tireless resilience of injustice — both in society and within man. He knew the price of justice delayed. It is our duty, then, to strive for our ideal society so that, some day, we might live up to it. This cannot be done by ignoring the practical truth: you are white, I am black. We have different histories and realities, families and accomplishments, values, scales, skin tone and genetic composition. This is real. Upon acknowledging the seemingly superficial differences of race, we can then accomplish justice; regardless of those engrained differences, we are both men deserving of the same application of the law.
This applies most urgently to violence. But it can also apply to everything else. For example, in his 1981 introduction to Invisible Man, Ralph Ellison writes about the difficulty of the black man in relating to literature because there were no black protagonists. No one resonated with their experience, perspective, race, no one was articulating their struggle for identity. He wrote, “Even if they did not exist, it would be necessary, both in the interest of fictional expressiveness and as examples of human possibility, to invent them.”
We must acknowledge our bias, it is our nature. Then, as the only animals capable of such consciousness, we may fight against it.
Whether we are all in agreement that race doesn’t scientifically exist is irrelevant, because “racism” and “privilege” do exist.
I will try to explain some of the reasons why White people struggle to admit that racism still exists. As debates about racism and a “post racial America” rage in my social media, I see these same frustrations in my fellow White people over and over. The dictionary defines racism as “poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race.” And by that logic, we’re the real victims of racism. Right? If that’s our only context for understanding racism, then surely someone thinking I’m racist just because I’m White is racism. It seems that we have come to a place where the single worst thing that we can be called, the single insult that most enrages us, is suggestion that we might actually be racist. What troubles me most in all of this is that we are so invested in proving that people of Color are “more racist” than we are or that we’re not racist, we are more upset by allegations that we might be racist than about the very real ways that racism plays out in the society around us. I see my fellow White people so wrapped up in defending the idea that systemic racism does not exist that we are unable to empathize with the real pain caused to people of Color by racism, both interpersonal and systemic.
All of this leaves me wondering about the roots of our defensiveness to admitting that racism is alive and well. Why are we so resistant to acknowledging the countless examples of our racial privilege? What do we risk by actually empathizing with people of Color and acknowledging how racial oppression plays out in our society? Almost every White person I know at least claims to live by a strong set of values, and I rarely meet people whose core values say that it’s good for people of Color to be treated as second class citizens. I don’t think I personally know anyone who believes that their core values sanction their participation in the hurting of other people. Both systemic and interpersonal racism hurt people. Racism destroys lives. So how is it that we can live more fully into the values that so many of us claim to hold when we’re defensive about whether we might be benefiting from racism?
1. White people must choose to extend our personal values towards racial issues, otherwise, we continue to contribute to White supremacy.
Racism is about the ways that virtually all of the systems in which we live (economic, educational, judicial, medical, and so on) were created to serve White people (particularly White, cisgender, straight men) while oppressing people of Color.
To understand the issues of race and racism that are being tackled by anti-racist movements like #BlackLivesMatter, we White folks need to make sure we’re being clear about the difference between Whiteness (also sometimes called White supremacy) and White people.
Whiteness is something created by wealthy Europeans that subsumes all light-skinned European ethnicities into one identity. Why was Whiteness created? For social control: to allow wealthy White elites to unite poor and middle class Whites against people of Color. Whiteness, then, refers to that system of social control and its institutions that were built to serve White wealth and power concentration.
White people, on the other hand, are individuals who have been caste into this racial hierarchy. We are not Whiteness, but we are inscribed with it from birth. As such, we face a choice. White people can choose whether to turn away from defending systems that are literally killing people of Color while we benefit. Instead, we can choose to invest in racial justice.
As White people, we have agency about how we will engage with the racial world around us. Yet, so many of us do all we can to convince ourselves, and others, that racism cannot be real (except in the rare cases of a KKK rally). Why? There are reasons for us as White people to invest in Whiteness, to invest in those systems that tell us that racism is not real and that we are not privileged. Some of those reasons are tangible, as we have real political and economic stakes in being defensive to racial justice movements. Others of those reasons are emotional, and as such, are far more terrifying to actually grapple with.
2. White people benefit materially from racism.
Therefore, most of us have an unacknowledged political and economic stake in maintaining White supremacy. Benefiting from racist systems does not mean that everything is magically easy for us. It just means that as hard as things are, they could always be worse. We could face the daily onslaught of overt and covert racism that impedes people of Color on top of all of our struggles.
I could lay out statistic after statistic, article after article, book after book about how White people are privileged in almost every place on earth that Europeans colonized (all but a handful of countries), but that will do no good if we’re not simply willing to listen. It’s our defensiveness to understanding the racialized world around us that we must understand if we want to live in a way that better aligns with our values, the values of justice and equity so many of us hold. After all, those values are in direct competition with our material realities.
Divesting from Whiteness means divesting from material realities that make our lives better at the expense of other people’s lives – and also at the expense of solidarity that could, eventually, raise the standard of living for all people, including us.
3. White people have an emotional stake in denying White supremacy.
That way, we can avoid dealing with how we are complicit in its pervasiveness. To admit that racism is real means that the world around us might not be as we thought it was, and it means that we are living out of alignment with our values.
Is it any wonder that some fight tooth and nail to deny that racism could be at play in police killings? Or that they disproportionately vote in ways that actually are against their self-interests (in an interesting contradiction to their economic and political stake) in order to enact policies that hurt people of Color? Or that they are far more outraged by allegations of their own racism than by the everyday racism that destroys people’s lives? They are living in a “culture of make believe.” Living in this fantasy comes at a tremendous emotional cost.
One of the most powerful of human capacities is our ability to empathize, to see ourselves in another human being even when we may have next to nothing in common outside of our humanity. When we defend racist systems and refuse to be self reflective about our complicity in them, we turn our back on that core, connecting aspect of what makes us human. By investing in Whiteness, we turn our backs on our own humanity.
4. Working towards racial solidarity means being vulnerable, because that’s the only way for us to transform ourselves for the better.
When I opened my heart to this empathy, it hurt tremendously, and it inspired me to change myself in hopes of transforming my community. But even further, some of my most powerful transformation came when I was asked to frame my investment in justice not only through empathic concern (how racism hurts people I love) but also through recognizing what I lose by investing in Whiteness (how racism hurts me). And I’m still answering that question.
All of us as White people are offered a choice, then. Will we choose to live into our values and into our human capacity for empathic concern? Or will we invest in the alluring benefits of Whiteness? If we choose the former, then we have to resist our inclination to be defensive when talking about racism and our own complicity in its systems. We can’t pretend that we are simply “post racial.”
We have to commit to finding a third way, a way characterized by building accountable relationships across difference and striving for anti-racist solidarity. But we should also recognize that by allowing ourselves to get in touch with why we are defensive, we open the door to something more than solidarity. We open the door to powerful self-transformation and to growth as people. By investing in what makes us human and by working to live more fully into values of justice and equity, we invite positive change into our lives.
And in doing so, we set a powerful standard for other White people in our lives: our families, our friends, our colleagues, and, most importantly, the next generation of White people to inherit this flawed world in which we live.
Beyond well said!
The methods of science do not claim to give us a certain truth, but these methods provide for us a way we can establish our best hypotheses as to what “truth” might be. A hypothesis is something that is supposed to be tested. We operate as if it is true until another possibility becomes more probable. This way we grow understandings, all the while possessing the stability of tested foundations. I think that it is accurate to say that those who have long had a habit of operating on premises that require testing and correction would be more likely to be free of many biases held by others who habitually protect (cherished beliefs) instead of test and correct. “What works best” gives us a better chance at steering a course that is harmonious with the rules of nature than “Live up to (cherish) what I, or my group, thinks is “ideal” or “moral.
Perhaps some of the confusion we are facing can be explained by the fact that race can be a fiction and something real at the same time. In the biological sciences it is a fiction. But the false belief that race is important, held and acted upon by millions, becomes a measurable social force to be reckoned with – and therefore in that sense it is important. The sickness of believing that something is important that does not have to be important is likely cured by educating people to that fact. Anything done that enables those with false beliefs to retain those false beliefs can be understood as doing something that is likely harmful.
The readers should like this exchange!
Well, my analysis (10 Jul 7:33) has touched and offended some sensitive and cherished feelings! That is the point at which important learning can sometimes occur. As an artist I know the power of conviction, and I have seen many examples of the power of emotional conviction to obstruct the evidence – the evidence that a growing mind needs to know – that is, if “knowing” and “learning” for that mind is more important than maintaining and/or nourishing the cherished feelings.
SB, I too saw emotions displayed on Fareed Zakaria’s GPS. I am quite aware of a vast range of human emotions (some are appropriate and some inappropriate). My life has been varied more than most and filled with adventures (geographic, emotional, and intellectual). But ideas stand alone to be tested and analyzed. The readers are waiting.
Daedal2207 writes: “The unreasonied biases are manifest.I withdraw my Pax Vobiscum!Sorry DS your claim to inherent superiority is without merit!”
Sorry that you read these hypotheses as being something personal. The ideas that I presented echo those of other well educated and reasoning minds. If what you have written about “inherent superiority” is true you must be denying fundamental findings that stem from the science of psychometry (as well as from other sciences such as physical anthropology). That would be very interesting! For the intellectual enlightenment of all our readers, be specific and provide the clear reasoned evidence that the hypotheses I have provided are “unreasoned” and cannot reflect some very possible realities.
Sorry again Don,but the sources on which you rely are now among the knuckle draggers of science..Physical anthropology now relies on genetics and DNA analysis and the findings on “race ” are as GS and I have presented them albeit anecdotally.Psychometrics is also vastly more sophisticated not only in techniques but in sensitivity to the classification of who is being tested and under what circumstances.
Have you used Uber or Lyft in place of taxis or limos or driving yourself? The world is different Don!,
Dear readers … and certainly hope there are many, many throughout the world!
DS: “… I have seen many examples of the power of emotional conviction to obstruct the evidence – the evidence that a growing mind needs to know – that is, if “knowing” and “learning” for that mind is more important than maintaining and/or nourishing the cherished feelings.”
I know of what you speak, sir. Were you talking to/looking at yourself in the mirror while positing your conclusion?
DS: “My life has been varied more than most and filled with adventures (geographic, emotional, and intellectual).
Everyone’s life is varied … certainly not in the exact same way … and one’s journey is certainly an adventure (if you accept the definition as “an undertaking usually involving danger and unknown risks”) to include health. It’s the takeaway from such adventures that reveal the character of the individual. There are plenty of world travelers who are mere postcard collectors … never truly understanding what they saw/experienced … while mind travelers unable to leave their own confines … “just” living … who demonstrate much greater knowledge of the universal humanity to which we all belong.
DS: “But ideas stand alone to be tested and analyzed.”
Ah, Socrates: “The unexamined life is not worth living” but, really, more applicable here is his … “True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing,” which makes Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” so deliciously appropriate.
Yes, indeed … “The readers are waiting.”
ThomasS: “Justice comes before the shot, not after.” Depth of reason redux. Yes … and that, in addition, questions the unfortunate use of a robot-cop. Pre-emptive prosecution/trial/judge/executioner? How un-American in principle … unless the reason for its use has a precedent in Hiroshima?
daedal2207: “Have you used Uber or Lyft in place of taxis or limos or driving yourself? The world is different Don!”
The best for last!!! The source of THE HEARTIEST LAUGH!!!!
Some basics to guide the intelligence – and subdue inappropriate emotions.
Everyone has to weigh risk to gain. Understanding (and surviving) life requires the application of probabilities. This guidance requires primarily the application of brain (which if done well disciplines the emotions to evolve appropriately).
Everyone has limited direct experience with his environment. Direct experience is anecdotal experience; it may, or may not, accurately reflect the bigger picture.
Given this limitation, an accurate judgment of the big picture (what is actually happening at the national level) requires the acquisition AND HONEST APPLICATION OF accurate statistical data. There are major groups (some political) who hold emotionally important beliefs whose agendas (like winning elections) incline them to be dishonest with the data.
Objective brains will understand how the following facts (facts that reflect the general nature of race-measured crime throughout the Country) should moderate the current widespread hysteria against police.
In 2015 the “Washington Post” found press documentation of 258 black victims of fatal police shootings, most of whom were seriously attacking the officer. In 2014 there were 6,095 black homicide victims in the United States. The killers are overwhelmingly other blacks – blacks who are responsible for a death risk ten times that of whites in urban areas. The probability of confronting armed shooting suspects is disproportionately going to be greater in districts that are predominantly black, predominantly high crime areas.
In Missouri in 2012 blacks made up 60.5 percent of all murder arrests and 58 percent of all robbery arrests, though they are less than 12 percent of the state’s population. In New York City blacks are only 23% of the population but commit over 75% of all shootings in the city, as reported by the victims of and witnesses to those shootings; whites commit under 2% of all shootings, according to victims and witnesses, though they are 33% of the city’s population, Blacks commit 70% of all robberies; whites4%.
Clearly this reveals significant social problems! But the police are not responsible. Their activity (and trending inactivity) is symptomatic of the ills that all the readers with Doctorate Degrees might particularly wish to address. Locate and treat the illness, not the symptoms.
For some it is difficult to grasp that crime statistics reflect the effect of heavy policing and reliance on arrests for state and local revenue.The illness DS, is within the soul and not on the surface of the skin.Trump has had his say and as might be expected he talks of police as the thin heroic line between our enviable way of life and the chaos of the jungle.It is just such nonsense that allow police to mistreat individuals that they deem unworthy of their”protection”.Haughty Hillary wins this one on commonsensical grounds.
Many “souls” have met their end because other souls were energized by false beliefs. My diagnosis is that false belief is the primary illness.
Rid ourselves of foolish belief. The injection of truth is essential. The probability that what we “know” is actually true is acquired not by following those who are most emotional, but by the rational analysis of empirical evidence. Statistics accurately measured and objectively analyzed are the only way whereby we can make accurate (objective) judgments about the big forces that will impact the future of all souls.
Consider: Prejudice is an example of sick belief but prejudgment takes many forms. It is not just racial.
The prejudged belief that all police are evil because of the actions of a few has put many souls in jeopardy.
The prejudged belief that Republican causes are “hateful” because they resist assigning “special” status to certain favored groups puts many souls in jeopardy.
Don,
You’ve tried to show statistically that blacks are responsible (percentage wise) for more acts of violence and crimes committed. To what do you owe that fact? What do you propose we do to correct that situation? Please don’t claim bad parenting as the cause, that’s disingenuous. Existence of conditions does not prove causation. Please do not gaslight or victim blame.
Thee many references throughout this blog to the linkage between economic exploitation and differential law enforcement(replacing exploitation through slavery) “trail of tears”,”chain gang”,etc. are ignored by DS.The implication is that the connotative and increasingly unscientific concept of race is genetically linked to crime.Those with the most fear cling most tightly.,while DNA analysis demonstrates not only the unity of homo sapiens but our linkage to much older archaic men with climatologic influences determining the somatotyping we call race.Facts abound,but selective inattention allows ” mystery” to be supplanted by “as everybody knows”..
@daedal2207
You and I are in complete agreement in that matter. Races don’t scientifically exist at all. There is actually far more differentiation of individuals within “races” than there is between “races”. Societies’ grouping of different ethnic groups, cultures, and nationalities into races has historically been for the purposes of discrimination, isolation, domination, subjugation, or prejudicial treatment of groups deemed “others”. It serves no scientific purpose. Fear and privilege figure into these divisions.
Thank you, Gregory.
I hope that we all appreciate – and respond to this important challenge.
There are many reasons why people do not learn how to navigate their lives in a healthy fashion – and manage to stay out of trouble. Most of the reasons have nothing to do with race. There are many disciplines that have to be learned for any person to perform well in any society. The best answers to your question require us to examine the reasons people have, or do not have the appropriate disciplines.
Apparently, most significant is the fact that nature is unfair. Luck is a big factor. If you had smart parents there is a better chance that you too were born with better than average aptitudes. Beyond that, your smart parents probably gave you a better than average environment in which to grow wise in mind and healthy in body. As inherited ability diminishes, there is an increasing probability that there will be poor decisions linked to all aspects of life. The University of Minnesota is conducting a running study of twins. Identical Twins Raised Apart is one aspect of this study and the researchers, according to an article in National Geographic, believe that human intelligence consists of 80% genetic inheritance and 20% environmental influence. With over a hundred years of Psychometric testing we have a wealth of insight into the importance and distribution of aptitude.
Check out the recent book, “Coming Apart” and we see statistical evidence that those who lack higher education (of all races) tend to have more social conflict in their lives. Those (of all races) with college and advanced degrees are increasingly isolating themselves (geographically and culturally) from those without.
Why is the black community engaging in more violent criminal behavior than other communities? There are statistically a similar number of whites with very low aptitudes (IQs lower than 75), but they tend to be dispersed more widely among a bigger population. The black community is more identifiably consolidated and thus its dysfunctions and frustrations are condensed and magnified within those areas.
Accelerating in the 60’s, well intentioned welfare programs split families. Mothers received more money from welfare when fathers were not present. Young men were deprived of (probably) the most meaningful and moderating element in male life, that of performing the provider functions of husband and father. Loose males proliferated in black communities.
Children, particularly boys, were raised without good role models. Thus we have seen high levels of crime, failure and frustration. With higher vulnerability, dysfunction and dependency, the community is particularly responsive to “leaders” and groups who provide feel-good explanations for their plight, and promise forms of salvation. The Democrats tend to believe falsely (and thus spread) an explanation that blacks have been oppressed by an “unfair”, “hateful”, racist, form of government managed by capitalist, “greedy”, “favored” white men who call themselves Republicans. Rage can be expected – along with passionate votes for “caring” Democrats.
Because of this rage, policemen justifiably understand that they are facing a greater risk of being killed if confronted by a black man. This sets the stage for our experiencing greater numbers of quick (and disastrous) judgments.
How do we correct a part of society that is disproportionately responsible for violent crime?
First of all (always) be honest. This makes it more likely that we will address the real causes of quality-of-life differences in a fashion that does not foment additional turmoil and waste resources. Nature’s unfairness in the distribution of aptitudes is a general and fundamental cause for unequal life styles. The disruption of cultural values that gave men meaning and discipline is likely the greater cause for excessive violent crime in this particular community. Do what we can to stop doing that which divides the family and do what we can to encourage males to be responsible husbands and fathers. The most likely corrections will never make all people equal in mind and body but can give us all the stability of being considered equal under the law. A rising, job-creating economy will lift all lives (But we must avoid the turmoil-producing, false belief that this marvelous life-saving power can or should benefit all equally).
The unreasonied biases are manifest.I withdraw my Pax Vobiscum!Sorry DS your claim to inherent superiority is without merit!
@daedal2207
I believe that this very intelligent person explains the reason behind Don S.’s beliefs:
“Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.” ~ Albert Einstein
DS’s positions, which show a clear, unabashed blindness to the record before him, are appalling. The generalizations are staggering. Is there a fear of not being thought of as special and/or gifted? From one who judges the Third World as “unsophisticated” … a visual and prejudicial perception, to be sure … there is no display of any comprehension for the human experience and its components. The platitudes continue on and on but the unscientific evidence of their claims remain the same … biased assertions to be dumped in the circular file of history. In the final analysis, one cannot totally comprehend … not to mean empathize … the impact of institutionalized racism unless experiencing it within one’s whole being. I submit today’s remarks by Angela Rye on CNN Fareed Zakaria’s GPS, in which she is asked her analysis of the concept of an African-American being “allowed” participation … but, with measured/understood restrictions. The body cringing is self-evident as she conveys the pain and frustration of the persistent double standard that is tolerated from the privileged class. https://youtu.be/dvDoc7nWSio.
“I was an aspiring astrophysicist, and that’s how I defined myself, not by my skin color. People didn’t treat me as someone with science ambitions. They treated me as someone they thought was going to mug them, or who was a shop lifter.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
GS: “Races don’t scientifically exist at all. There is actually far more differentiation of individuals within ‘races’ than there is between ‘races’.”
Yes! Proven.
daedal2207: “The unreasonied biases are manifest.”
Yes … in an embarrassingly transparent way.
Weapons are merely a means to an end, although a highly efficient one. Solving the problem of means won’t solve all of the underlying problems. The following link describes the problem in play in Dallas and elsewhere quite well.
Sometimes terrorists wear badges and are publicly sanctioned executioners.
There are additional issues here.(As GS implies)Who decided that the situation was hopeless and had deteriorated to the point where a robotic execution was called for? Is this the new due process.?
Maybe Judge Dredd/Robocop is already upon us and from hereon policing will take the place of judicial action?
We are now hearing that this attack on the Dallas police was the work of a lone gunman.(a black army veteran named Micah Johnson)Isis is not implicated but retaliatory race hatred is.Hilary has responded saying that we need a national dialogue and that something ugly has been unleashed in America.She urges continued support of police and identifies the internet as a powerful stream where hatred runs untrammeled.I wish her response were more focused and less “careful”.
I still wonder why a trapped and immobile Johnson was executed.(See Dredd,Helter Skelter,and other references on this blog.The villains scroll is uneasily helpful).Maybe the threat of job loss by utilization of robots will lead to social planning in order to stay the “invisible hand”FROM FORCING JOB LOSS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT.
Reblogged this on daedal2207's Blog.