Did you take a class in critical race theory?

[Gospel]

CRT is not about understanding that "it sucks to be black in America". It's about understanding why, and how it came to be that it sucks to be black in America.

While I couldn't give a shit about "CRT", I can say that the majority of such classes are really more about why it continues to suck to be black; the history part just is there to show the mechanics of how the cycle built itself, to reveal the existence of it's inertia.

Here's the problem though: there are a lot of white people who will also claim that it really sucks to be white right now. Dosn't matter if their neighbor is doing well. They are stuck in dead in jobs with little set aside for retirement. They aren't paying attention to the nuances of this issue. They don't care about the existence of it's inertia. Any issue that creates separate groups is going to empower this group into joining the right or anyone who will pay attention to their issues.

This is unfortunate for them because wealth inequality & racial inequality are two separate issues. When they cut ass and run away from racial inequality in an effort to juxtapose it against their financial struggles they end up making the wrong argument as well as being used by the very same people fucking them financially.

 

[Jarhyn]

Here's the problem though: there are a lot of white people who will also claim that it really sucks to be white right now. Dosn't matter if their neighbor is doing well. They are stuck in dead in jobs with little set aside for retirement. They aren't paying attention to the nuances of this issue. They don't care about the existence of it's inertia. Any issue that creates separate groups is going to empower this group into joining the right or anyone who will pay attention to their issues.

This is unfortunate for them because wealth inequality & racial inequality are two separate issues. When they cut ass and run away from racial inequality in an effort to juxtapose it against their financial struggles they end up making the wrong argument as well as being used by the very same people fucking them financially.

I don't know that they are, entirely, separate. I see one more as the vehicle of the other. Of course with the racial aspect, there is an additional layer in that not only is the individual poor, but with racial disparities, this extends to not just themselves but their entire family and extended family, at least in the majority of cases I have seen.

I can say that even were I poor and homeless, I have an aunt, and cousins, and nieces and nephews, and have a reasonable plethora of friends whose families also have enough wealth to spare the effort of getting me into my feet.

I suppose this would make them "separate" issues, but really, one is just a compounded version of the other.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Here's the problem though: there are a lot of white people who will also claim that it really sucks to be white right now. Dosn't matter if their neighbor is doing well. They are stuck in dead in jobs with little set aside for retirement. They aren't paying attention to the nuances of this issue. They don't care about the existence of it's inertia. Any issue that creates separate groups is going to empower this group into joining the right or anyone who will pay attention to their issues.

This is unfortunate for them because wealth inequality & racial inequality are two separate issues. When they cut ass and run away from racial inequality in an effort to juxtapose it against their financial struggles they end up making the wrong argument as well as being used by the very same people fucking them financially.

Totally agree.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

CRT is not about understanding that "it sucks to be black in America". It's about understanding why, and how it came to be that it sucks to be black in America.

While I couldn't give a shit about "CRT", I can say that the majority of such classes are really more about why it continues to suck to be black; the history part just is there to show the mechanics of how the cycle built itself, to reveal the existence of it's inertia.

Here's the problem though: there are a lot of white people who will also claim that it really sucks to be white right now. Dosn't matter if their neighbor is doing well. They are stuck in dead in jobs with little set aside for retirement. They aren't paying attention to the nuances of this issue. They don't care about the existence of it's inertia. Any issue that creates separate groups is going to empower this group into joining the right or anyone who will pay attention to their issues.

Yeah:

Black People: There has been an intentional effort to keep blacks from succeeding in the US that was still affecting us well into the 1970s and other policies impacting black communities more than white communities well into the 1980s and 1990s (drug war). It still has its tentacles in the system today and has led to a self-perpetuating effect.
White People: You don't think we have problems?
Black People: Yeah, we have those types of problems too!
White People: You just don't get it that being white doesn't mean being rich.
Black People: We didn't say it...
White People: And I find it offensive that you think just because you are black that you can't succeed, when in fact lots of blacks have succeeded.
Black People: When you look at...
White People: This is just reverse racism.
Black People: *dying a little inside*

Shorter version

Black People: *nuanced argument*
White People: *broad brushed interpretation*

 

[Harry Bosch]

Here's the problem though: there are a lot of white people who will also claim that it really sucks to be white right now. Dosn't matter if their neighbor is doing well. They are stuck in dead in jobs with little set aside for retirement. They aren't paying attention to the nuances of this issue. They don't care about the existence of it's inertia. Any issue that creates separate groups is going to empower this group into joining the right or anyone who will pay attention to their issues.

Yeah:

Black People: There has been an intentional effort to keep blacks from succeeding in the US that was still affecting us well into the 1970s and other policies impacting black communities more than white communities well into the 1980s and 1990s (drug war). It still has its tentacles in the system today and has led to a self-perpetuating effect.
White People: You don't think we have problems?
Black People: Yeah, we have those types of problems too!
White People: You just don't get it that being white doesn't mean being rich.
Black People: We didn't say it...
White People: And I find it offensive that you think just because you are black that you can't succeed, when in fact lots of blacks have succeeded.
Black People: When you look at...
White People: This is just reverse racism.
Black People: *dying a little inside*

Shorter version

Black People: *nuanced argument*
White People: *broad brushed interpretation*

Jimmy: that's a little harsh! I don't know. I know many non-white people who are just as non-nuanced (is that a word!)? There are many people who are focused on making ends meet. They don't have time to check out the latest intellectual arguments. They just want something better. And discussions that someone else may not have it as good just aren't going fly with many of them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Here's the problem though: there are a lot of white people who will also claim that it really sucks to be white right now. Dosn't matter if their neighbor is doing well. They are stuck in dead in jobs with little set aside for retirement. They aren't paying attention to the nuances of this issue. They don't care about the existence of it's inertia. Any issue that creates separate groups is going to empower this group into joining the right or anyone who will pay attention to their issues.

Yeah:

Black People: There has been an intentional effort to keep blacks from succeeding in the US that was still affecting us well into the 1970s and other policies impacting black communities more than white communities well into the 1980s and 1990s (drug war). It still has its tentacles in the system today and has led to a self-perpetuating effect.
White People: You don't think we have problems?
Black People: Yeah, we have those types of problems too!
White People: You just don't get it that being white doesn't mean being rich.
Black People: We didn't say it...
White People: And I find it offensive that you think just because you are black that you can't succeed, when in fact lots of blacks have succeeded.
Black People: When you look at...
White People: This is just reverse racism.
Black People: *dying a little inside*

Shorter version

Black People: *nuanced argument*
White People: *broad brushed interpretation*

Jimmy: that's a little harsh!

No it isn't. 1) It wasn't meant to be harsh to begin with 2) I feel that there is definitely a portion that don't care to know better.

Black People after an umpteenth unarmed black killed by police: Black lives matter!
White People: That is racist!
Black People: What?
White People: Other lives matter too!
Black People: We aren't saying Only Black Lives Matter, we mean Black Lives Matter Too, but it was getting wordy.
White People: Reverse racism!

I don't know. I know many non-white people who are just as non-nuanced (is that a word!)?

1) If you can type it, it's a word in my book.
2) And yes, whites are not the exclusive rights holder to broadbrushed or umbrella'd (<- see, I did it again) arguments. Defund the police being one very poorly thought out title.

There are many people who are focused on making ends meet. They don't have time to check out the latest intellectual arguments. They just want something better. And discussions that someone else may not have it as good just aren't going fly with many of them.

Yes, but like my somewhat hypothetical argument addresses, the whites that are whining about blacks complaining because "it isn't easy just because one is white" is missing the boat, and CRT is part is to address this disconnect. But some whites are still rabidly opposed to any discussion about it. They don't know better and don't care to.

 

[Gospel]

Here's the problem though: there are a lot of white people who will also claim that it really sucks to be white right now. Dosn't matter if their neighbor is doing well. They are stuck in dead in jobs with little set aside for retirement. They aren't paying attention to the nuances of this issue. They don't care about the existence of it's inertia. Any issue that creates separate groups is going to empower this group into joining the right or anyone who will pay attention to their issues.

This is unfortunate for them because wealth inequality & racial inequality are two separate issues. When they cut ass and run away from racial inequality in an effort to juxtapose it against their financial struggles they end up making the wrong argument as well as being used by the very same people fucking them financially.

I don't know that they are, entirely, separate. I see one more as the vehicle of the other. Of course with the racial aspect, there is an additional layer in that not only is the individual poor, but with racial disparities, this extends to not just themselves but their entire family and extended family, at least in the majority of cases I have seen.

I can say that even were I poor and homeless, I have an aunt, and cousins, and nieces and nephews, and have a reasonable plethora of friends whose families also have enough wealth to spare the effort of getting me into my feet.

I suppose this would make them "separate" issues, but really, one is just a compounded version of the other.

They are separate. Wealth inequality has been around for ages, just look at the industrial revolution when adorable white children were working coal mines. At that time racism against whites (amongst the citizenry) was negligible yet wealth inequality was rampant. What separates the two of them is that wealth inequality targets, everyone, while racism targets a specific race. Sure, wealth inequality has been the result of weaponized wealth distribution by racists for racists reasons, however, wealth inequality can exist absent racism.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't know that they are, entirely, separate. I see one more as the vehicle of the other. Of course with the racial aspect, there is an additional layer in that not only is the individual poor, but with racial disparities, this extends to not just themselves but their entire family and extended family, at least in the majority of cases I have seen.

I can say that even were I poor and homeless, I have an aunt, and cousins, and nieces and nephews, and have a reasonable plethora of friends whose families also have enough wealth to spare the effort of getting me into my feet.

I suppose this would make them "separate" issues, but really, one is just a compounded version of the other.

They are separate. Wealth inequality has been around for ages, just look at the industrial revolution when adorable white children were working coal mines. At that time racism against whites (amongst the citizenry) was negligible yet wealth inequality was rampant. What separates the two of them is that wealth inequality targets, everyone, while racism targets a specific race. Sure, wealth inequality has been the result of weaponized wealth distribution by racists for racists reasons, however, wealth inequality can exist absent racism.

It should be remembered that many that forced the Capitol to be evacuated during the Electoral College count weren't suffering from wealth inequality.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Poverty is mostly a mental state and can only be escaped by the people understanding this and changing their approach.

There are many factors causing poverty - no one who is actually involved in studying poverty or working to alleviate it subscribes to your handwaved mostly a mental state" analysis. For example, the World Bank estimates

Global extreme poverty rose in 2020 for the first time in over 20 years as the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic compounded the forces of conflict and climate change, which were already slowing poverty reduction progress. About 120 million additional people are living in poverty as a result of the pandemic, with the total expected to rise to about 150 million by the end of 2021.

Half of the poor are children. Women represent a majority of the poor in most regions and among some age groups. About 70 percent of the global poor aged 15 and over have no schooling or only some basic education.

Almost half of poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa live in just five countries: Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania, Ethiopia, and Madagascar.

More than 40 percent of the global poor live in economies affected by fragility, conflict and violence, and that number is expected to rise to 67 percent in the next decade. Those economies have just 10 percent of the world’s population.

About 132 million of the global poor live in areas with high flood risk.

(https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview)

Global is a very different issue. When the economy is trash most of the people are poor. I'm talking about the people in poverty in developed nations.

 

[bilby]

Robin Steenman, the chapter head of “Moms for Liberty” in Tennessee, is raising money for a family she says has been so traumatized by “critical race theory” that a first grader requires psychological help.

The GoFundMe is asking for $5,000 because the family’s 7-year-old daughter is in treatment for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder because she was taught “critical race theory” in her first-grade class.

Steenman recently appeared on Glenn Beck’s radio show to talk about her work in her community to create hysteria around the teaching of CRT. She boasted that she’s recruited 1,100 angry parents in her community to organize for “Moms for Liberty,” a right-wing group run by conservative women who masquerade as a community mom’s organization.

Most notably, my 7 year old (first grader) (sic) has shown the most tragic changes. We went from a normal functioning, sweet child to one who will literally crumble at the slightest challenge and word,” the story explains.

“My daughter started coming home asking very pointed questions about who she is and if she is a bad person. She came home extremely upset. She told me ‘Mom, I’m white. My friend is brown. I need to apologize to him for being white because white people have done bad things to people with brown skin,'” the mother said.

She cited the “Wit & Wisdom” program used by the school that they are now working to ban at the school board level.

https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2021/07/mother-starts-5000-gofundme-for-1st-grader-she-says-has-ocd-because-of-critical-race-theory/

Shades of Jussie Smollett.

Well, as long as someone makes some money out of it.

I too could be rich, if it weren't for these pesky moral qualms about barefaced lying.

 

[Jarhyn]

I don't know that they are, entirely, separate. I see one more as the vehicle of the other. Of course with the racial aspect, there is an additional layer in that not only is the individual poor, but with racial disparities, this extends to not just themselves but their entire family and extended family, at least in the majority of cases I have seen.

I can say that even were I poor and homeless, I have an aunt, and cousins, and nieces and nephews, and have a reasonable plethora of friends whose families also have enough wealth to spare the effort of getting me into my feet.

I suppose this would make them "separate" issues, but really, one is just a compounded version of the other.

They are separate. Wealth inequality has been around for ages, just look at the industrial revolution when adorable white children were working coal mines. At that time racism against whites (amongst the citizenry) was negligible yet wealth inequality was rampant. What separates the two of them is that wealth inequality targets, everyone, while racism targets a specific race. Sure, wealth inequality has been the result of weaponized wealth distribution by racists for racists reasons, however, wealth inequality can exist absent racism.

It can. But my point is, can racism reasonably exist without wealth inequality?

 

[Copernicus]

I don't know that they are, entirely, separate. I see one more as the vehicle of the other. Of course with the racial aspect, there is an additional layer in that not only is the individual poor, but with racial disparities, this extends to not just themselves but their entire family and extended family, at least in the majority of cases I have seen.

I can say that even were I poor and homeless, I have an aunt, and cousins, and nieces and nephews, and have a reasonable plethora of friends whose families also have enough wealth to spare the effort of getting me into my feet.

I suppose this would make them "separate" issues, but really, one is just a compounded version of the other.

They are separate. Wealth inequality has been around for ages, just look at the industrial revolution when adorable white children were working coal mines. At that time racism against whites (amongst the citizenry) was negligible yet wealth inequality was rampant. What separates the two of them is that wealth inequality targets, everyone, while racism targets a specific race. Sure, wealth inequality has been the result of weaponized wealth distribution by racists for racists reasons, however, wealth inequality can exist absent racism.

It can. But my point is, can racism reasonably exist without wealth inequality?

I suppose that one would have to imagine a situation in which there can be racial tensions between poor people or middle class people of different racial characteristics. Can you imagine that? I'm thinking of neighborhoods that were subject to white flight because of African Americans who could afford homes in those neighborhoods.

 

[Jarhyn]

It can. But my point is, can racism reasonably exist without wealth inequality?

I suppose that one would have to imagine a situation in which there can be racial tensions between poor people or middle class people of different racial characteristics. Can you imagine that?

"Racism" of the sort discussed is not "racial tensions" but rather systems which retain and force such tensions through an in-group and an out-group.

It helps to not conflate usages.

There isn't much in this particular exchange; it is idle trivia and little more at this point.

Taxonomically, I see "racism" as a particularly pernicious and awful form of "wealth inequality".

 

[bilby]

It can. But my point is, can racism reasonably exist without wealth inequality?

I suppose that one would have to imagine a situation in which there can be racial tensions between poor people or middle class people of different racial characteristics. Can you imagine that?

"Racism" of the sort discussed is not "racial tensions" but rather systems which retain and force such tensions through an in-group and an out-group.

It helps to not conflate usages.

There isn't much in this particular exchange; it is idle trivia and little more at this point.

Taxonomically, I see "racism" as a particularly pernicious and awful form of "wealth inequality".

It's most certainly not. Racism is only passingly related to wealth inequality; While the one can cause the other (in both directions), it's nevertheless obvious that racism exists amongst people of equal wealth. Wealth and status are not the same thing, by a long chalk.

 

[Gospel]

I don't know that they are, entirely, separate. I see one more as the vehicle of the other. Of course with the racial aspect, there is an additional layer in that not only is the individual poor, but with racial disparities, this extends to not just themselves but their entire family and extended family, at least in the majority of cases I have seen.

I can say that even were I poor and homeless, I have an aunt, and cousins, and nieces and nephews, and have a reasonable plethora of friends whose families also have enough wealth to spare the effort of getting me into my feet.

I suppose this would make them "separate" issues, but really, one is just a compounded version of the other.

They are separate. Wealth inequality has been around for ages, just look at the industrial revolution when adorable white children were working coal mines. At that time racism against whites (amongst the citizenry) was negligible yet wealth inequality was rampant. What separates the two of them is that wealth inequality targets, everyone, while racism targets a specific race. Sure, wealth inequality has been the result of weaponized wealth distribution by racists for racists reasons, however, wealth inequality can exist absent racism.

It can. But my point is, can racism reasonably exist without wealth inequality?

It's not only can. It has. And to your question my non over thinking answer is no, my overthinking answer is yes, given humans enough time we'll find a way.

 

[SimpleDon]

There are many factors causing poverty - no one who is actually involved in studying poverty or working to alleviate it subscribes to your handwaved mostly a mental state" analysis. For example, the World Bank estimates
(https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview)

Global is a very different issue. When the economy is trash most of the people are poor. I'm talking about the people in poverty in developed nations.

A google search for "causes of poverty in the developed countries" many reasons but none cited "mental state." The very first answer was from Encyclopedia.com.

... In nearly all industrialized countries—with the notable exception of those in Scandinavia—poverty is rising, particularly among children, and the depth of poverty is increasing. Reasons include stagnating wages, long-term unemployment, and rising prices of essentials such as food and fuel. More complex reasons include racism, immigration, and increasing numbers of divorces that lead to single parenthood. A decrease or total absence of social safety nets such as daycare, elder care, and health care complicates the matter even further.

THE UNITED STATES

At 12.7% in 2004 (up from 12.5% in 2003), the United States has the highest poverty rate in the developed world (U.S. Census Bureau, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2004, August 2005). (See Table 6.1.) Poverty in the United States is strongly connected to race and ethnicity. African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and American Indians and Alaska natives were three times more likely to live in poverty than white Americans. (See Table 6.2.)

The very first reason that they cited, stagnating wages, is academic-speak for suppressed wages to increase profits. The reason that I have consistently listed as the main reason behind the increase in poverty in this second gilded age of over-compensating the rich investor class.

 

[Elixir]

For me it’s not even about racism (the result). It’s more about hypocrisy and lies (the cause).

 

[Jarhyn]

It can. But my point is, can racism reasonably exist without wealth inequality?

It's not only can. It has. And to your question my non over thinking answer is no, my overthinking answer is yes, given humans enough time we'll find a way.

I really like discussing things with you. I'm sorry if I am frustrating most of the time.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A google search for "causes of poverty in the developed countries" many reasons but none cited "mental state." The very first answer was from Encyclopedia.com.

... In nearly all industrialized countries—with the notable exception of those in Scandinavia—poverty is rising, particularly among children, and the depth of poverty is increasing. Reasons include stagnating wages, long-term unemployment, and rising prices of essentials such as food and fuel. More complex reasons include racism, immigration, and increasing numbers of divorces that lead to single parenthood. A decrease or total absence of social safety nets such as daycare, elder care, and health care complicates the matter even further.

THE UNITED STATES

At 12.7% in 2004 (up from 12.5% in 2003), the United States has the highest poverty rate in the developed world (U.S. Census Bureau, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2004, August 2005). (See Table 6.1.) Poverty in the United States is strongly connected to race and ethnicity. African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and American Indians and Alaska natives were three times more likely to live in poverty than white Americans. (See Table 6.2.)

The very first reason that they cited, stagnating wages, is academic-speak for suppressed wages to increase profits. The reason that I have consistently listed as the main reason behind the increase in poverty in this second gilded age of over-compensating the rich investor class.

The primary cause of poverty in the US is not working enough hours.

 

[Elixir]

The primary cause of poverty in the US is not working enough hours.

The primary cause of poverty in the US is the capitalist structure that makes it more profitable for Companies to restrict employees to "part time" hours, than to pay full time wages and benefits.
This perpetuates the poverty that ensures the availability of "desperation" workers. Loren represents that it's the choice of the lazy workers. But workers don't benefit from the perpetuation of hours-restricted poverty - COMPANIES do.