Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

DOJ: Ferguson police routinely discriminate

popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"

It's not just the residents of Ferguson who have been saying it. Poll any inner city region in the US and you are likely to find that its marginalized residents are disproportionately profiled by police. In these regions, the criminal justice system is not one intent on protecting and serving, but rather on controlling and instilling obedience. It's not just a race issue. It's also an issue of class, of gender, and of control.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:34:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I don't buy anything this DOJ says. Holder and Obama are all about black power. If they really wanted a unified culture, they wouldn't jump onto one side of the issue every time it came up, and allowed the local and state justice systems run their course before getting involved.

There is SUCH a big racism problem in this country, and people like them don't help at all, because you need both sides to feel welcome at the table, not "well somebody that looks kinda like you did something to somebody that looks kinda like me this one time, so you all suck" attitude.

They might as well put on black pointed hoods and burn crescents in white folks' yards.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:41:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:34:09 PM, Skynet wrote:
I don't buy anything this DOJ says. Holder and Obama are all about black power. If they really wanted a unified culture, they wouldn't jump onto one side of the issue every time it came up, and allowed the local and state justice systems run their course before getting involved.

There is SUCH a big racism problem in this country, and people like them don't help at all, because you need both sides to feel welcome at the table, not "well somebody that looks kinda like you did something to somebody that looks kinda like me this one time, so you all suck" attitude.

They might as well put on black pointed hoods and burn crescents in white folks' yards.

This has go to be the worst comment I've seen in a long time on this website. And that's saying something. You literally have no evidence or reason to think any of this.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:52:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"

It's not just the residents of Ferguson who have been saying it. Poll any inner city region in the US and you are likely to find that its marginalized residents are disproportionately profiled by police. In these regions, the criminal justice system is not one intent on protecting and serving, but rather on controlling and instilling obedience. It's not just a race issue. It's also an issue of class, of gender, and of control.

Pretty much. I just don't get why people are so quick to dismiss these peoples' reports of racism from various police departments when an overwhelming amount of evidence corroborates their claims. These people were saying it back in August and we had people accusing them of "injecting race into the conversation". lol
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:53:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:41:35 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:34:09 PM, Skynet wrote:
I don't buy anything this DOJ says. Holder and Obama are all about black power. If they really wanted a unified culture, they wouldn't jump onto one side of the issue every time it came up, and allowed the local and state justice systems run their course before getting involved.

There is SUCH a big racism problem in this country, and people like them don't help at all, because you need both sides to feel welcome at the table, not "well somebody that looks kinda like you did something to somebody that looks kinda like me this one time, so you all suck" attitude.

They might as well put on black pointed hoods and burn crescents in white folks' yards.

This has go to be the worst comment I've seen in a long time on this website. And that's saying something. You literally have no evidence or reason to think any of this.

I have no anger directed towards you, or anyone else on this thread. I am venting. Look, if there was a "black Klan" this is how I imagine it. I don't think Obama is Muslim, either, by the way, though he seems to want some people to think it.
As someone with very close family ties to both black and white people, I HATE it when people of influence rile up people on one side or the other. Obama was supposedly the great uniter. The end result of the White House's actions over the last 6 years involving race, is in my opinion no different than if a Grand Wizard or Black Panther were elected. Hate on both sides. Things were way better in the 90's for race relations!
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Fly
Posts: 2,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:57:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
They also uncovered a racist anti-Obama joke making the rounds amongst Ferguson police back in 2008-- "You know a black man can't keep a job more than four years..."

Luckily, there are people in various police forces around the country who desire to purge this disease from our law enforcement. The FBI director's speech was a shining example of this...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,138
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 12:16:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"
Sadly, we did because of all the ignorant people who have never experienced discrimination personally, so clearly it must not exist anywhere.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 12:36:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

I agree with Tulle that this is along the lines of the 'Study reveals that women who request input on apparent weight do not appreciate honesty' headlines.

It's sad that this sort of thing needs to be tested. So many people are completely ignorant of the ugly past of law enforcement when it comes to race. I always bring up the extrajudicial execution of Fred Hampton and other COINTELPRO operations. Most of white America has NO IDEA that it even happened; the ignorance is just staggering. Because they see a much rosier picture of the police, they refuse to believe that they are in the wrong.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 7:29:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 12:16:51 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"
Sadly, we did because of all the ignorant people who have never experienced discrimination personally, so clearly it must not exist anywhere.

Yup. Exactly. I just wonder where all the folks on DDO are who were denying that Ferguson PD (or police in general for that matter) had ANY race problem and were so outraged that black people in Ferguson had the audacity to pull the "race card" and think Brown's death was just an instance in a larger pattern.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
YamaVonKarma
Posts: 7,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 7:45:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
... the police force I study with doesn't do any discrimination that I know of. Otherwise, I wouldn't even accept the officers who train us as instructors in the first place.

When stories such as this break, I'm always glad to live in such a city where the residents are treated equally.
People who I've called as mafia DP1:
TUF, and YYW
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 7:55:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 12:36:46 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

I agree with Tulle that this is along the lines of the 'Study reveals that women who request input on apparent weight do not appreciate honesty' headlines.

It's sad that this sort of thing needs to be tested. So many people are completely ignorant of the ugly past of law enforcement when it comes to race. I always bring up the extrajudicial execution of Fred Hampton and other COINTELPRO operations. Most of white America has NO IDEA that it even happened; the ignorance is just staggering. Because they see a much rosier picture of the police, they refuse to believe that they are in the wrong.

YES.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
DarthVitiosus
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 8:32:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

This needed to be studied but the results shouldn't surprise anyone. However, there will never be an honest discussion about anything related to race because most people are disingenuous and fraudulent. They say one thing and do another.

Ask most whites who sympathize with the protesters or claim they are against racism, would they ever move into a majority black neighborhood? Would they send their kids to a majority black school? Would they ever attend a majority black church? They probably would try to avoid answering, when I know and majority of people know deep down they wouldn't do any of what I stated. Why? Aren't they against racism? lol The stats don't lie about which group tends to overwhelmingly integrate/assimilate in the other's neighborhoods blacks---> whites not vice versa.

When a black person or a white person states they want to talk about race with someone of a different skin color. It is normally a lie, they just want to hear what they want hear come out of the other person's lips. This is the same with other issues. If that is the intention should we expect to come to a moment of clarity where we all agree?

We can't have an honest dialogue to get effective results with such fraudulence being perpetuated. Race or any other important issue can not be solved because most people are insincere when they intend on bringing it up.
WILL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL:
#1. I have met 10 people worth discussing with on DDO who are not interested in ideological or romantic visions of the world we all live in.
#2. 10 people admit they have no interest in any one else's opinion other than their own.
#3. 10 people admit they are products of their environment and their ideas derive from said environment rather than doing any serious critical thinking and search for answers themselves.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 8:48:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"

It's not just the residents of Ferguson who have been saying it. Poll any inner city region in the US and you are likely to find that its marginalized residents are disproportionately profiled by police. In these regions, the criminal justice system is not one intent on protecting and serving, but rather on controlling and instilling obedience. It's not just a race issue. It's also an issue of class, of gender, and of control.

I couldn't agree more, but, of course, since I'm white, I am a racist for saying this. Or maybe for saying the following:

I am not totally certain it is a race issue at all. Well, not at all, but significantly.
The statistics compare only two values. Race (by population) and crime (by varying factors). Why should we assume that these are equal?
For example, traffic stops.
How many miles to whites drive vs blacks? If these are disproportionate from the population, then a disproportionate amount of traffic stops actually makes sense.
Assume we are talking about traffic light violations. Obviously, the immediate population of the area is a significant factor, which can skew the numbers.

Statistics can be very misleading and are very manipulative, as they are easily manipulated.

Further, bringing it back to the underlined, my issue with racial profiling is it is not just about race, if at all. Race is used as an indicator because it is easy. Flawed, yes, but any generalization or statistical impression is (e.g. young men (ever notice that young black men are the most likely to be shot by police, not women or middle aged) or single drivers after bar close). We both know that blacks are more likely to be uneducated and/or poor, and also to be more likely to be arrested for violent crime. Does any of this have to do with being black? Doubtful, but black is the easiest way to identify these traits. Similar to the smell of weed for a drug dealer.

To illustrate my point, let me use this hypothetical, and just assume the facts are true:
Most people in the projects are black
Crime is rampant in the projects
Police decide to aggressively enforce the projects
As a result, blacks arrests go up.

Is this policy of cleaning up the projects racial discrimination? I don't think so, and I think people are too emotional and rely on a knee-jerk reaction. The above hypothetical could just as likely apply to discrimination of the poor.

Now, this is not to say that the Ferguson police force is not exercising discrimination, nor any police interaction anywhere cannot be motivated by such discrimination. I do not claim this to be the case. I claim only that the statistics do not show enough evidence for me to conclude it is the reason, just as with Officer Wilson, the evidence shown (especially if he was telling the truth) did not support the racial bias claim. In fact, I'd say it was just as prejudice for people to claim racism in that case because "that's what cops do", while ignoring the facts.
My work here is, finally, done.
DarthVitiosus
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 9:06:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 12:36:46 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

I agree with Tulle that this is along the lines of the 'Study reveals that women who request input on apparent weight do not appreciate honesty' headlines.
Agreed.

It's sad that this sort of thing needs to be tested. So many people are completely ignorant of the ugly past of law enforcement when it comes to race. I always bring up the extrajudicial execution of Fred Hampton and other COINTELPRO operations. Most of white America has NO IDEA that it even happened; the ignorance is just staggering. Because they see a much rosier picture of the police, they refuse to believe that they are in the wrong.

HOLD UP! That is taken out of context. We have to keep an idea about the attitude and climate of the times specifically related to blacks for this topic as opposed to others on the New Left. Remember, it is often claimed it was the New Left that elected Nixon since the general populace was getting tired and very frightened of the riots across the nation in the summers of 66' , 67', as well as the King riots and the 68' Chicago DNC convention police riot. There is a reason why 67' has an ugly nickname "the Brink of Disaster" as well as the names for that summer, "The Long Hotsummer"(riots) and the "Summer of Love(seen as college youth gone wild to many)."

But back to the real topic. We should keep in mind, what the Black Panthers' leaders were saying like Bobby Seale: "The whole black nation has to be put together as a BLACK ARMY. And we gon' walk on this nation, walk on this racist power structure, and we gon' say to the whole damn government - STICK 'EM UP MOTHER******! THIS IS A HOLD UP!" Or how about when Mr. Newton claimed he was going to organize a Black Panther legion to aid the North Vietnamese. Or how about when Kwame Ture and Jamil Al Amin were talking about "offing" the police, whites, and uncle toms at the Free Huey Rally. What would be the appropriate response for the government when an organization is clearly advocating violence? Many would argue they were openly advocating for revolution which would be considered treason according to the government. I will admit, the rhetoric toned down when Mr. Newton got out of jail but the damage was already done and the government acted against it in 68' and 69'.

Let us keep in mind even George Lincoln Rockwell and his ilk was monitored but not acted against because they were seen as less of a threat since they were not advocating revolution.

However, I don't think reasonable organizations like the Urban League, CORE, SCLC, and the NAACP should of been monitored. They were not threatening or claiming to want to incite violence or want to have a revolution. I don't think we should subscribe to a revisionist commentary about what the radicals were saying and advocating when they had these very violent tones. Then let us not forget the sectarianism that traditionally has plagued the far left which would be another topic altogether. I tend to write a lot about things I tend to think I know, I don't mean to inconvenience you but I want to be clear as possible.
WILL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL:
#1. I have met 10 people worth discussing with on DDO who are not interested in ideological or romantic visions of the world we all live in.
#2. 10 people admit they have no interest in any one else's opinion other than their own.
#3. 10 people admit they are products of their environment and their ideas derive from said environment rather than doing any serious critical thinking and search for answers themselves.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 9:30:15 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:53:45 PM, Skynet wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:41:35 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:34:09 PM, Skynet wrote:
I don't buy anything this DOJ says. Holder and Obama are all about black power. If they really wanted a unified culture, they wouldn't jump onto one side of the issue every time it came up, and allowed the local and state justice systems run their course before getting involved.

There is SUCH a big racism problem in this country, and people like them don't help at all, because you need both sides to feel welcome at the table, not "well somebody that looks kinda like you did something to somebody that looks kinda like me this one time, so you all suck" attitude.

They might as well put on black pointed hoods and burn crescents in white folks' yards.

This has go to be the worst comment I've seen in a long time on this website. And that's saying something. You literally have no evidence or reason to think any of this.

I have no anger directed towards you, or anyone else on this thread. I am venting.
Look, if there was a "black Klan" this is how I imagine it.

Then you suffer from a lack of imagination. This was would be the most mild "black Klan" ever (mainly because they aren't racist).

I don't think Obama is Muslim, either, by the way, though he seems to want some people to think it.

O....kay....

As someone with very close family ties to both black and white people, I HATE it when people of influence rile up people on one side or the other.

Me too. Please explain how they "riled" people up though?

Obama was supposedly the great uniter. The end result of the White House's actions over the last 6 years involving race, is in my opinion no different than if a Grand Wizard or Black Panther were elected. Hate on both sides.

....Right. So where is the hate on their side, again?

Things were way better in the 90's for race relations!

You mean when Amadou Diallo was gunned down for reaching for his wallet? You mean when Rodney King was beat on camera and the ensuing riots? You mean those 90's? Which 90's where you living in?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 10:43:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 8:48:04 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"

It's not just the residents of Ferguson who have been saying it. Poll any inner city region in the US and you are likely to find that its marginalized residents are disproportionately profiled by police. In these regions, the criminal justice system is not one intent on protecting and serving, but rather on controlling and instilling obedience. It's not just a race issue. It's also an issue of class, of gender, and of control.

I couldn't agree more, but, of course, since I'm white, I am a racist for saying this. Or maybe for saying the following:

I am not totally certain it is a race issue at all. Well, not at all, but significantly.
The statistics compare only two values. Race (by population) and crime (by varying factors). Why should we assume that these are equal?
For example, traffic stops.
How many miles to whites drive vs blacks? If these are disproportionate from the population, then a disproportionate amount of traffic stops actually makes sense.
Assume we are talking about traffic light violations. Obviously, the immediate population of the area is a significant factor, which can skew the numbers.

Statistics can be very misleading and are very manipulative, as they are easily manipulated.

Further, bringing it back to the underlined, my issue with racial profiling is it is not just about race, if at all. Race is used as an indicator because it is easy. Flawed, yes, but any generalization or statistical impression is (e.g. young men (ever notice that young black men are the most likely to be shot by police, not women or middle aged) or single drivers after bar close). We both know that blacks are more likely to be uneducated and/or poor, and also to be more likely to be arrested for violent crime. Does any of this have to do with being black? Doubtful, but black is the easiest way to identify these traits. Similar to the smell of weed for a drug dealer.

To illustrate my point, let me use this hypothetical, and just assume the facts are true:
Most people in the projects are black
Crime is rampant in the projects
Police decide to aggressively enforce the projects
As a result, blacks arrests go up.

Is this policy of cleaning up the projects racial discrimination? I don't think so, and I think people are too emotional and rely on a knee-jerk reaction. The above hypothetical could just as likely apply to discrimination of the poor.

Now, this is not to say that the Ferguson police force is not exercising discrimination, nor any police interaction anywhere cannot be motivated by such discrimination. I do not claim this to be the case. I claim only that the statistics do not show enough evidence for me to conclude it is the reason, just as with Officer Wilson, the evidence shown (especially if he was telling the truth) did not support the racial bias claim. In fact, I'd say it was just as prejudice for people to claim racism in that case because "that's what cops do", while ignoring the facts.

I agree that Blacks are more likely to be under educated. This includes a greater likelihood of being illiterate, performing worse in science and math fields, and being incorrectly assigned to special education courses. I also agree that they are more likely to be incarcerated and profiled. There is also a phenomenon colloquially referred to as the Black Effect, which shows that, other factors being equal, areas are still disproportionately impoverished if more Black people live there.

When looking at these inequalities, educators and social scientists already control for a lot of the factors you are referring to (e.g. crime rate, population density, SES). So while I agree that there are a number of factors at play, race is certainly one of them.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 10:56:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 8:48:04 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"

It's not just the residents of Ferguson who have been saying it. Poll any inner city region in the US and you are likely to find that its marginalized residents are disproportionately profiled by police. In these regions, the criminal justice system is not one intent on protecting and serving, but rather on controlling and instilling obedience. It's not just a race issue. It's also an issue of class, of gender, and of control.

I couldn't agree more, but, of course, since I'm white, I am a racist for saying this. Or maybe for saying the following:

I am not totally certain it is a race issue at all. Well, not at all, but significantly.
The statistics compare only two values. Race (by population) and crime (by varying factors). Why should we assume that these are equal?
For example, traffic stops.
How many miles to whites drive vs blacks? If these are disproportionate from the population, then a disproportionate amount of traffic stops actually makes sense.
Assume we are talking about traffic light violations. Obviously, the immediate population of the area is a significant factor, which can skew the numbers.

Statistics can be very misleading and are very manipulative, as they are easily manipulated.

Further, bringing it back to the underlined, my issue with racial profiling is it is not just about race, if at all. Race is used as an indicator because it is easy. Flawed, yes, but any generalization or statistical impression is (e.g. young men (ever notice that young black men are the most likely to be shot by police, not women or middle aged) or single drivers after bar close). We both know that blacks are more likely to be uneducated and/or poor, and also to be more likely to be arrested for violent crime. Does any of this have to do with being black? Doubtful, but black is the easiest way to identify these traits. Similar to the smell of weed for a drug dealer.

To illustrate my point, let me use this hypothetical, and just assume the facts are true:
Most people in the projects are black
Crime is rampant in the projects
Police decide to aggressively enforce the projects
As a result, blacks arrests go up.

Is this policy of cleaning up the projects racial discrimination? I don't think so, and I think people are too emotional and rely on a knee-jerk reaction. The above hypothetical could just as likely apply to discrimination of the poor.

Now, this is not to say that the Ferguson police force is not exercising discrimination, nor any police interaction anywhere cannot be motivated by such discrimination. I do not claim this to be the case. I claim only that the statistics do not show enough evidence for me to conclude it is the reason, just as with Officer Wilson, the evidence shown (especially if he was telling the truth) did not support the racial bias claim. In fact, I'd say it was just as prejudice for people to claim racism in that case because "that's what cops do", while ignoring the facts.

Please tell me what exactly WOULD constitute as enough evidence for you to substantiate the claim. Tell me exactly what the statistics would have to look like in order for you to conclude that there is substantial racial bias. One off situations can be explained away easily enough plausibly but when you have to explain away every instance in the report it simply becomes implausible over all.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
DarthVitiosus
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 12:14:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 10:43:16 AM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/4/2015 8:48:04 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:33:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

tulle's response: "Did we really need a study to tell us this?"

It's not just the residents of Ferguson who have been saying it. Poll any inner city region in the US and you are likely to find that its marginalized residents are disproportionately profiled by police. In these regions, the criminal justice system is not one intent on protecting and serving, but rather on controlling and instilling obedience. It's not just a race issue. It's also an issue of class, of gender, and of control.

I couldn't agree more, but, of course, since I'm white, I am a racist for saying this. Or maybe for saying the following:

I am not totally certain it is a race issue at all. Well, not at all, but significantly.
The statistics compare only two values. Race (by population) and crime (by varying factors). Why should we assume that these are equal?
For example, traffic stops.
How many miles to whites drive vs blacks? If these are disproportionate from the population, then a disproportionate amount of traffic stops actually makes sense.
Assume we are talking about traffic light violations. Obviously, the immediate population of the area is a significant factor, which can skew the numbers.

Statistics can be very misleading and are very manipulative, as they are easily manipulated.

Further, bringing it back to the underlined, my issue with racial profiling is it is not just about race, if at all. Race is used as an indicator because it is easy. Flawed, yes, but any generalization or statistical impression is (e.g. young men (ever notice that young black men are the most likely to be shot by police, not women or middle aged) or single drivers after bar close). We both know that blacks are more likely to be uneducated and/or poor, and also to be more likely to be arrested for violent crime. Does any of this have to do with being black? Doubtful, but black is the easiest way to identify these traits. Similar to the smell of weed for a drug dealer.

To illustrate my point, let me use this hypothetical, and just assume the facts are true:
Most people in the projects are black
Crime is rampant in the projects
Police decide to aggressively enforce the projects
As a result, blacks arrests go up.

Is this policy of cleaning up the projects racial discrimination? I don't think so, and I think people are too emotional and rely on a knee-jerk reaction. The above hypothetical could just as likely apply to discrimination of the poor.

Now, this is not to say that the Ferguson police force is not exercising discrimination, nor any police interaction anywhere cannot be motivated by such discrimination. I do not claim this to be the case. I claim only that the statistics do not show enough evidence for me to conclude it is the reason, just as with Officer Wilson, the evidence shown (especially if he was telling the truth) did not support the racial bias claim. In fact, I'd say it was just as prejudice for people to claim racism in that case because "that's what cops do", while ignoring the facts.

I agree that Blacks are more likely to be under educated. This includes a greater likelihood of being illiterate, performing worse in science and math fields, and being incorrectly assigned to special education courses. I also agree that they are more likely to be incarcerated and profiled. There is also a phenomenon colloquially referred to as the Black Effect, which shows that, other factors being equal, areas are still disproportionately impoverished if more Black people live there.

When looking at these inequalities, educators and social scientists already control for a lot of the factors you are referring to (e.g. crime rate, population density, SES). So while I agree that there are a number of factors at play, race is certainly one of them.

This is getting interesting.

I think one of the other factors that should be added to what you said is how many youth commit a crime when they are young and they are screwed for life if it can't be expunged from their record. Then as an adult they have to deal with the difficulty in not getting decent jobs and many being stuck in temp agency jobs or similar jobs that pay low. So many are very likely to slump back into crime. This is a very real dilemma which is very difficult to solve since many people don't want to hire convicts.

At the end of the day, the vast amount of drug selling and the "War on Drugs" needs to be addressed in order to halt some of the problems but it would not be a solution to all the violent crime. Which pays more selling an 8ball or working at McDonald's for a day? Remember an 8ball can make you over $200-$500 depending on where you are at and how you sell it.
WILL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL:
#1. I have met 10 people worth discussing with on DDO who are not interested in ideological or romantic visions of the world we all live in.
#2. 10 people admit they have no interest in any one else's opinion other than their own.
#3. 10 people admit they are products of their environment and their ideas derive from said environment rather than doing any serious critical thinking and search for answers themselves.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 12:31:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 10:56:40 AM, popculturepooka wrote:

Please tell me what exactly WOULD constitute as enough evidence for you to substantiate the claim. Tell me exactly what the statistics would have to look like in order for you to conclude that there is substantial racial bias. One off situations can be explained away easily enough plausibly but when you have to explain away every instance in the report it simply becomes implausible over all.

For the record, I was referring to the statistics graphic on the left side of the page, as that is what people often use.

That is a valid question, and one I cannot answer objectively. I would say it is based on the totality of factors and relevant issues. I'm not going to say that the 80+% marks are not troubling, and I will go so far as to say that it is very likely due to discrimination (expecially where jaywalking and other highly discretionary offenses occur).
I do find it odd that there is so much discrimination, and yet the DoJ could not prosecute.

Let me ask you the same: Given a population of 2;1 blacks and whites, at what point is the disparity CLEARLY evidence of discrimination/bias? 68%? 70?%? 80%? I'm assuming you, too, cannot answer this as well.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 12:42:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 10:43:16 AM, Maikuru wrote:

I agree that Blacks are more likely to be under educated. This includes a greater likelihood of being illiterate, performing worse in science and math fields, and being incorrectly assigned to special education courses. I also agree that they are more likely to be incarcerated and profiled. There is also a phenomenon colloquially referred to as the Black Effect, which shows that, other factors being equal, areas are still disproportionately impoverished if more Black people live there.

When looking at these inequalities, educators and social scientists already control for a lot of the factors you are referring to (e.g. crime rate, population density, SES). So while I agree that there are a number of factors at play, race is certainly one of them.

No, to the crux of the matter.
Assuming this is all true, and all relevant to the liklihood of crime, and the police's job is to solve/prevent crime, is it wrong for the police force to maximize their efforts by focusing on the most likely to be breaking the law? Does it really matter WHAT the metric is?
As I said, single drivers after bar close are targeted for DWI. This, too, is discrimination, but if studies show this is the most likely to be a criminal, you focus on that, right?
The "Black Effect" and the other issues that lead to this result are a society issue, and should be addressed and rectified, but should the police be concerned about that, or do their job?
My work here is, finally, done.
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 2:24:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 12:42:56 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 10:43:16 AM, Maikuru wrote:

I agree that Blacks are more likely to be under educated. This includes a greater likelihood of being illiterate, performing worse in science and math fields, and being incorrectly assigned to special education courses. I also agree that they are more likely to be incarcerated and profiled. There is also a phenomenon colloquially referred to as the Black Effect, which shows that, other factors being equal, areas are still disproportionately impoverished if more Black people live there.

When looking at these inequalities, educators and social scientists already control for a lot of the factors you are referring to (e.g. crime rate, population density, SES). So while I agree that there are a number of factors at play, race is certainly one of them.

No, to the crux of the matter.
Assuming this is all true, and all relevant to the liklihood of crime, and the police's job is to solve/prevent crime, is it wrong for the police force to maximize their efforts by focusing on the most likely to be breaking the law? Does it really matter WHAT the metric is?
As I said, single drivers after bar close are targeted for DWI. This, too, is discrimination, but if studies show this is the most likely to be a criminal, you focus on that, right?
The "Black Effect" and the other issues that lead to this result are a society issue, and should be addressed and rectified, but should the police be concerned about that, or do their job?

In your initial post, you asked if being Black was a reason for the fact that Blacks are disproportionately poor and uneducated. I am answering that yes, it is a reason; controlling for other factors, being Black alone is positively related to worse social outcomes. Similarly, being Black is a reason for the disproportionate amount of criminal justice attention on Blacks. The fact that Blacks may also warrant more of that attention in some instances does nothing to negate the disproportionate punishment.

In short, saying "they cause more of the issues, so they deserve more of the attention" actually doesn't address anything. Note that if the study in the OP found a proportionate amount of police action against Blacks, this study would not have reported any significant findings. The fact that it did means that *above and beyond the justified additional attention*, there was still an added effect of discrimination. This is the concern.

Now, like you said, the fact that Blacks are also more likely to be poor and uneducated is a larger, systematic issue, and fundamentally at the root of much of this. However, and this goes without saying, racism is still a thing.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Fly
Posts: 2,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 2:53:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 2:24:01 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/4/2015 12:42:56 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 10:43:16 AM, Maikuru wrote:

I agree that Blacks are more likely to be under educated. This includes a greater likelihood of being illiterate, performing worse in science and math fields, and being incorrectly assigned to special education courses. I also agree that they are more likely to be incarcerated and profiled. There is also a phenomenon colloquially referred to as the Black Effect, which shows that, other factors being equal, areas are still disproportionately impoverished if more Black people live there.

When looking at these inequalities, educators and social scientists already control for a lot of the factors you are referring to (e.g. crime rate, population density, SES). So while I agree that there are a number of factors at play, race is certainly one of them.

No, to the crux of the matter.
Assuming this is all true, and all relevant to the liklihood of crime, and the police's job is to solve/prevent crime, is it wrong for the police force to maximize their efforts by focusing on the most likely to be breaking the law? Does it really matter WHAT the metric is?
As I said, single drivers after bar close are targeted for DWI. This, too, is discrimination, but if studies show this is the most likely to be a criminal, you focus on that, right?
The "Black Effect" and the other issues that lead to this result are a society issue, and should be addressed and rectified, but should the police be concerned about that, or do their job?

In your initial post, you asked if being Black was a reason for the fact that Blacks are disproportionately poor and uneducated. I am answering that yes, it is a reason; controlling for other factors, being Black alone is positively related to worse social outcomes. Similarly, being Black is a reason for the disproportionate amount of criminal justice attention on Blacks. The fact that Blacks may also warrant more of that attention in some instances does nothing to negate the disproportionate punishment.

In short, saying "they cause more of the issues, so they deserve more of the attention" actually doesn't address anything. Note that if the study in the OP found a proportionate amount of police action against Blacks, this study would not have reported any significant findings. The fact that it did means that *above and beyond the justified additional attention*, there was still an added effect of discrimination. This is the concern.

Now, like you said, the fact that Blacks are also more likely to be poor and uneducated is a larger, systematic issue, and fundamentally at the root of much of this. However, and this goes without saying, racism is still a thing.

Unfortunately, it does not go without saying. All too often I come across people who think that talking about and pointing out racism makes the problem worse. They feel that ignoring the problem makes it fade away. Do nothing-- the ideal solution! That history shows the opposite is also something they would rather not discuss...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 4:03:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 2:53:10 PM, Fly wrote:

Unfortunately, it does not go without saying. All too often I come across people who think that talking about and pointing out racism makes the problem worse. They feel that ignoring the problem makes it fade away. Do nothing-- the ideal solution! That history shows the opposite is also something they would rather not discuss...

Yes, I get that a lot. I do research on race and ethnicity in students and every once in a while, I'll get the comment that we should all just be colorblind. If it's not one extreme, unfortunately, it's the other.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 7:08:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 9:30:15 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:53:45 PM, Skynet wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:41:35 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:34:09 PM, Skynet wrote:
I don't buy anything this DOJ says. Holder and Obama are all about black power. If they really wanted a unified culture, they wouldn't jump onto one side of the issue every time it came up, and allowed the local and state justice systems run their course before getting involved.

There is SUCH a big racism problem in this country, and people like them don't help at all, because you need both sides to feel welcome at the table, not "well somebody that looks kinda like you did something to somebody that looks kinda like me this one time, so you all suck" attitude.

They might as well put on black pointed hoods and burn crescents in white folks' yards.

This has go to be the worst comment I've seen in a long time on this website. And that's saying something. You literally have no evidence or reason to think any of this.

I have no anger directed towards you, or anyone else on this thread. I am venting.
Look, if there was a "black Klan" this is how I imagine it.

Then you suffer from a lack of imagination. This was would be the most mild "black Klan" ever (mainly because they aren't racist).

I don't think Obama is Muslim, either, by the way, though he seems to want some people to think it.

O....kay....

As someone with very close family ties to both black and white people, I HATE it when people of influence rile up people on one side or the other.

Me too. Please explain how they "riled" people up though?

Obama was supposedly the great uniter. The end result of the White House's actions over the last 6 years involving race, is in my opinion no different than if a Grand Wizard or Black Panther were elected. Hate on both sides.

....Right. So where is the hate on their side, again?


Things were way better in the 90's for race relations!

You mean when Amadou Diallo was gunned down for reaching for his wallet? You mean when Rodney King was beat on camera and the ensuing riots? You mean those 90's? Which 90's where you living in?

Every time a white cop does something to an unarmed black, and it reaches the national news, you're guaranteed to get
1. An angry mob in your town.
2. The President verbally supporting the angry mob DURING the investigation.

I know from my own experience the black culture in this country, unlike most European countries, is not integrated into our culture. Over there, it's often the same as the difference between red heads and blondes. We're a divided house. One culture or the other needs to go away, or they need to absorb each other if there's going to be harmony. This is why I support interracial marriage. And because we're still segregated there are misunderstandings. I've gotten over the automatic fear of blacks Hollywood pushes with it's typecasting long ago. Many times, they have no idea what to do with me because I don't treat them as they assume I will (especially younger black men).
But one major misconception the black culture still has is that white people are more like them they really are: When a black person walks down the street and sees another, there is generally a greeting and acknowledgement of unspoken solidarity. They know this stranger is on their side, because they're in the same culture. They are usually perplexed when they find there is no such comradery among white people. If I'm in a strange white neighborhood, I do not feel the same sense of belonging or security a black person generally feels if they are in a strange black neighborhood. If I see a stranger walking down the street, saying "hi" is awkward and often unwelcome.

Not understanding whites are NOT all on the same team, many blacks assume we ARE all on the same team. A mob angry about one white police officer shooting one black person will not properly discriminate between that officer and other individuals. Granted, that one officer will receive the brunt of the anger, but to them, the action of that officer is not just a reflection of the person, or the department, but all white people.

So what's this got to do with Obama?

All you would need from a white politician or celebrity is one slip or joke in front of the wrong people and they are condemned as racist forever.
If equality is really important, the same should be applied to our President. A thought out, scripted quote from his own book spoken directly to the mic is a bit different than an off-color joke poorly timed. Listen to the audio from the President himself:
https://www.youtube.com...

He blames "white folks" for all the worlds problems, as if Hitler and the most vile Popes of the past, and Stalin and Timothy McVeigh operate in harmony with the entirety of white people to oppress the world. "White" is a fabrication of his mind to embody all that he sees as wrong with the world. And you know what? I never signed up for that group! But I'm partially responsible according to our President because I am a "white folk." Can anyone explain this away or justify it?

Usually people understand the first part of what I said here, and it's novel to them. The second part is harder to get across. There is an assumption the children should pay for the crimes of the fathers. My friend works in a service department. He told his customer they did not take Discover. The customer muttered back, "Do you take reparations?" What garbage! What bigotry! I'd be delighted if this was no longer an issue, but it will always be as long as no one addresses it. There has been SO much done to address white on black racism, and it's still a problem. But why focus exclusively on a leak on one side that's now half it's original size when there is a growing leak on the other side? Both will sink the ship.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 10:34:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 9:06:35 AM, DarthVitiosus wrote:
At 3/4/2015 12:36:46 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:18:53 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com...

Surprise, surprise (not)! This just confirms what black residents of Ferguson were saying all along...

I agree with Tulle that this is along the lines of the 'Study reveals that women who request input on apparent weight do not appreciate honesty' headlines.
Agreed.

It's sad that this sort of thing needs to be tested. So many people are completely ignorant of the ugly past of law enforcement when it comes to race. I always bring up the extrajudicial execution of Fred Hampton and other COINTELPRO operations. Most of white America has NO IDEA that it even happened; the ignorance is just staggering. Because they see a much rosier picture of the police, they refuse to believe that they are in the wrong.

HOLD UP! That is taken out of context. We have to keep an idea about the attitude and climate of the times specifically related to blacks for this topic as opposed to others on the New Left. Remember, it is often claimed it was the New Left that elected Nixon since the general populace was getting tired and very frightened of the riots across the nation in the summers of 66' , 67', as well as the King riots and the 68' Chicago DNC convention police riot. There is a reason why 67' has an ugly nickname "the Brink of Disaster" as well as the names for that summer, "The Long Hotsummer"(riots) and the "Summer of Love(seen as college youth gone wild to many)."

But back to the real topic. We should keep in mind, what the Black Panthers' leaders were saying like Bobby Seale: "The whole black nation has to be put together as a BLACK ARMY. And we gon' walk on this nation, walk on this racist power structure, and we gon' say to the whole damn government - STICK 'EM UP MOTHER******! THIS IS A HOLD UP!" Or how about when Mr. Newton claimed he was going to organize a Black Panther legion to aid the North Vietnamese. Or how about when Kwame Ture and Jamil Al Amin were talking about "offing" the police, whites, and uncle toms at the Free Huey Rally. What would be the appropriate response for the government when an organization is clearly advocating violence? Many would argue they were openly advocating for revolution which would be considered treason according to the government. I will admit, the rhetoric toned down when Mr. Newton got out of jail but the damage was already done and the government acted against it in 68' and 69'.

Yeah, and we have no idea how accurate any of the accusations are because COINTELPRO focused on fabrication of evidence to frame those who were considered a threat by an unaccountable and opaque agency.

Fred Hampton also came to prominence after many of the more violent leadership had been killed. He was very skilled at curbing gang violence, promoting unity in urban communities, and actually creating a constructive environment for black youth to grow up in. He was brutally murdered not for fomenting rebellion, but for fostering unity. COINTELPRO wasn't about punishing crimes or preventing violence, it is about maintaining the control of the privileged class. Hence the necessity to frame and assassinate people instead of gathering evidence and prosecuting them.

Let us keep in mind even George Lincoln Rockwell and his ilk was monitored but not acted against because they were seen as less of a threat since they were not advocating revolution.

Plenty of groups have advocated for revolution without being systematically hunted down, harassed, framed, and murdered by their own government without accountability or transparency. When they crossed the line into treason, they were dealt with via... treason charges.

However, I don't think reasonable organizations like the Urban League, CORE, SCLC, and the NAACP should of been monitored.

I don't think that the US government should be engaged in the business of deciding behind closed doors which organizations are 'reasonable', and then fabricating evidence and imprisoning or outright murdering the leadership of those who don't quite make the mark. If an organization is truly acting violently, if it is truly harming people, then there are valid legal channels for dealing with them. If someone is guilty, it is not necessary to frame them.

They were not threatening or claiming to want to incite violence or want to have a revolution. I don't think we should subscribe to a revisionist commentary about what the radicals were saying and advocating when they had these very violent tones. Then let us not forget the sectarianism that traditionally has plagued the far left which would be another topic altogether. I tend to write a lot about things I tend to think I know, I don't mean to inconvenience you but I want to be clear as possible.

I agree that some of the groups involved were treasonous. I disagree that COINTELPRO, in both breadth and principle, was in any way a justifiable response to that.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 9:42:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 12:31:57 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 10:56:40 AM, popculturepooka wrote:

Please tell me what exactly WOULD constitute as enough evidence for you to substantiate the claim. Tell me exactly what the statistics would have to look like in order for you to conclude that there is substantial racial bias. One off situations can be explained away easily enough plausibly but when you have to explain away every instance in the report it simply becomes implausible over all.

For the record, I was referring to the statistics graphic on the left side of the page, as that is what people often use.

That is a valid question, and one I cannot answer objectively. I would say it is based on the totality of factors and relevant issues. I'm not going to say that the 80+% marks are not troubling, and I will go so far as to say that it is very likely due to discrimination (expecially where jaywalking and other highly discretionary offenses occur).
I do find it odd that there is so much discrimination, and yet the DoJ could not prosecute.


I found that a bit strange as well.

Let me ask you the same: Given a population of 2;1 blacks and whites, at what point is the disparity CLEARLY evidence of discrimination/bias? 68%? 70?%? 80%? I'm assuming you, too, cannot answer this as well.

When it starts reaching disproportionate numbers is when I start worrying. For example, I think when the population of black people in Feguson is 69 - 70 % but they account for 80 - 95 % of the arrests/stops/charges...I think that's clear.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
DarthVitiosus
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 9:54:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 10:34:38 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:

Yeah, and we have no idea how accurate any of the accusations are because COINTELPRO focused on fabrication of evidence to frame those who were considered a threat by an unaccountable and opaque agency.
No, actually it is very well documented from what has been released. I would recommend reading Ward Churchill's book first about COINTELPRO and I have other recommendations. There is a reason why some were given top priority to be taken action against and others were just monitored.

Fred Hampton also came to prominence after many of the more violent leadership had been killed. He was very skilled at curbing gang violence, promoting unity in urban communities, and actually creating a constructive environment for black youth to grow up in. He was brutally murdered not for fomenting rebellion, but for fostering unity. COINTELPRO wasn't about punishing crimes or preventing violence, it is about maintaining the control of the privileged class. Hence the necessity to frame and assassinate people instead of gathering evidence and prosecuting them.
Now you are getting into sentiments which is nothing short of confusion about what people's intentions were or were not. You blatantly ignored why I stated the Black Panther Party for Self Defense was targeted instead to claim COINTELPRO was about the maintenance of the privileged class. You also ignored how I pointed out how the general populace was getting irritated with the various outbursts, summer riots, and incidents that was taking place. There is a reason why the FBI's COINTELPRO program started to act more decisively and more violently in 68' and 69' opposed to the time before the MLK assassination when the FBI just monitored opposed to acting. Especially with the growing idea of a race war after the summer of 66's riots, the FBI was more on alert but was put on to full alert when MLK died. The general population or the "Silent Majority"(not elites like academics,political observers,lobbyists) grew tired of what was taking place and it was a backlash.

Look at the rhetoric that was stated from the BPPSD, it is obvious why they were targeted in particular. It was in the same rhetoric, the 68' Chicago activists were denied protest permits because of the alleged threat of lacing LSD in the water. Again, what is the appropriate way for the government to respond? After an incident has already happened? The government can't prevent LSD from being put into the water after it already has happened.

Plenty of groups have advocated for revolution without being systematically hunted down, harassed, framed, and murdered by their own government without accountability or transparency. When they crossed the line into treason, they were dealt with via... treason charges.
No radical group that was advocating revolution was NOT hunted down during any period of heightened tension. For example, after World War I and how Communists, Anarchists, Socialists, and Black Nationalists were hunted down due to the response of the 1919 Bolshevik Revolution which scared many Western countries and their citizens. During, the 1930s, many far right wing groups and some far left wing groups were watched closely and acted against. The Communists again were hunted down again after World War II due to the rampant anti-Communism before and during Senator McCarthy's moment. Then the mid to late 1960s caused many far left groups, some moderate left groups, and a minority of far right wing groups were hunted down, co-opted, and some cases gunned down.

I don't think that the US government should be engaged in the business of deciding behind closed doors which organizations are 'reasonable', and then fabricating evidence and imprisoning or outright murdering the leadership of those who don't quite make the mark. If an organization is truly acting violently, if it is truly harming people, then there are valid legal channels for dealing with them. If someone is guilty, it is not necessary to frame them.
There are legal channels to deal with them? How did that work out when Timothy McVeigh bombed Oklahoma City? After all, he had composed multiple threatening letters. Or how about Mohammed Salameh and the World Trade Center bombing? He was previously thought as being involved in the Kahane's assassination and was being monitored by the FBI. In theory what you say makes sense cause I used to hold such a position, but in practice it is horrendous because I could bring up far more examples including 9/11. 9/11, the government was well aware of the participants and the threat long before it happened, they just didn't act on it. We can't stop people after they have already engaged in violence. We can't resurrect people after they have been killed either.

I agree that some of the groups involved were treasonous. I disagree that COINTELPRO, in both breadth and principle, was in any way a justifiable response to that.

I think it was justifiable for the time period. Was it properly executed? I am don't think so. But I admit I am looking in retrospect from a view of safety opposed to the view of danger in the mid to late 60s.
WILL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL:
#1. I have met 10 people worth discussing with on DDO who are not interested in ideological or romantic visions of the world we all live in.
#2. 10 people admit they have no interest in any one else's opinion other than their own.
#3. 10 people admit they are products of their environment and their ideas derive from said environment rather than doing any serious critical thinking and search for answers themselves.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 10:03:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 9:42:38 AM, popculturepooka wrote:

Let me ask you the same: Given a population of 2;1 blacks and whites, at what point is the disparity CLEARLY evidence of discrimination/bias? 68%? 70?%? 80%? I'm assuming you, too, cannot answer this as well.

When it starts reaching disproportionate numbers is when I start worrying. For example, I think when the population of black people in Feguson is 69 - 70 % but they account for 80 - 95 % of the arrests/stops/charges...I think that's clear.

So.... you can't answer the question, either, huh?
With black residents comprising 67% of residents, 68% of stops involving them is disproportionate. At some point, disproportionality is acceptable, and I am asking what that point is where discrimination/bias is evident by numbers alone, and would like to know how that number is calculated.
A knee-jerk reaction to numbers is exactly what people who give numbers like to see.
My work here is, finally, done.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 1:09:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 10:03:02 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/5/2015 9:42:38 AM, popculturepooka wrote:

Let me ask you the same: Given a population of 2;1 blacks and whites, at what point is the disparity CLEARLY evidence of discrimination/bias? 68%? 70?%? 80%? I'm assuming you, too, cannot answer this as well.

When it starts reaching disproportionate numbers is when I start worrying. For example, I think when the population of black people in Feguson is 69 - 70 % but they account for 80 - 95 % of the arrests/stops/charges...I think that's clear.

So.... you can't answer the question, either, huh?

With black residents comprising 67% of residents, 68% of stops involving them is disproportionate. At some point, disproportionality is acceptable, and I am asking what that point is where discrimination/bias is evident by numbers alone, and would like to know how that number is calculated.

I never said anything about numbers alone. For instance, I take testimony into account as well. Black residents of ferguson were saying that this type of discrimination has been happening there for a long time but Brown's death kind of just put it in the spot light. And we already know that this sort of thing has happened in numerous other police departments. So that's background evidence.

if the numbers corroborate what these people are saying then that just make the evidence stronger.

A knee-jerk reaction to numbers is exactly what people who give numbers like to see.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!