How Criminality Became a Black Thing

[Rhea]

Don't be afraid. Be aware. Yes, white culture _is_ to blame in part for the poverty and trauma that black americans have faced. IN very large part. I know you ignore it.

It isn't "white culture" any more than gang thug life or being violent is "black culture".

I disagree. It was a white culture that propagated Jim Crow. It was a white culture that propagated redlining housing. It was a white culture that propagated the "war on drugs". It was a white culture that propagated "stop and frisk". It was a white culture that propagated lending inequalities. And it is a white culture that persists in hiring inequalities.

For all of these things, it was a culture native to the group of people who were not being harmed.

 

[Rhea]

Leftist activists, including many BLMers, want to ignore this implication because history is already over and cannot be changed,

I disagree. Current, ongoing and destructive racism continues to exist in housing, lending and hiring. Not to mention education and medical services.

only the proximal causes can be changed and this explanation acknowledges that many of those reside in the the minds of black people themselves. When the political goal is not to fix the problem of crime disparities, but to attack racism, then any explanation that doesn't presume racism as the most immediate and thus "fixable" cause is ignored or actively denied.

It is not ignored or denied. Adviocating for drug rehab instead of jail is part of this ongoing and actual acceptance of the symptoms of the previous racism that need to be addressed to fix the problem of disparity.

Most leftists consider a two-tier approach:
Attack the racism that continues to exist. Make it so that we don't create new dysfuntion.
Attack the symptoms of the previous racism. Make it so that the current dysfunction is treated and eliminated.

We see this all the time, including on this board, every time statistical differences in traffic stops, searches, or arrests are used as evidence of racism on the part of the officers involved in those interactions. That invalid inference presumes no actual difference in behaviors that would warrant stops, searches, or arrests. When this objection is raised, the response is usually "So, you are saying that black people are inherently more criminal?". That response shows myopic denial of the impact of historical events on current conditions and psychology that produces the unlawful behaviors.

No.
Studies are pretty clear that two people committing the same crime will have different outcomes based only on their skin color.
Also studies are quite clear that two people doing nothing wrong at all will have different outcomes based only on their skin color.

This isn't an invalid inference. Not matter how many times you want to say that there must be some cause other than racism. When SES is controlled for, it STILL shows up as based on skin color.

This absurd denial also underlies efforts to deny that black American differ on average in relevant ways regarding their beliefs, attitudes, and reactions to situations that would impact unlawful behaviors.

No. It represents the two-tiered acknowledgement: There is _BOTH_ current racism and ALSO behavioral effects from previous racism.
It would be idiotic to try to treat only the "proximal causes" while still enabling a system that continues to create additional proximal cause dysfuntion.

It is at the heart of the whole strawman "anything but racism" meme, in which any effort to identify actual proximal causes other than direct racism of the people involved, even when the distal causes of past racism are explicitly acknowledged, is met with derision and false claims that the speaker is denial the existence of racism rather than just engaging in rational thought and considering the plausibility of various complex causal models of human behavior.
We see a manifestation of this here and in other threads where any mention of SES rather than racism as the proximal causal factor is attacked as though it is a denial of racism, rather than recognizing the various pathways by which racism can have an impact, which is critical for the efficacy for any efforts to change the outcome.

This sounds like you saying that no current racism exists at all and every problem is caused by some past, distant and now defunct racism.
I disagree that any rational reading of the current environment indicates an absence of current and ongoing racism.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

When you ignore my posts above and insist on pushing these "white culture" and "black culture" memes, you deserve what you get.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It is at the heart of the whole strawman "anything but racism" meme, in which any effort to identify actual proximal causes other than direct racism of the people involved, even when the distal causes of past racism are explicitly acknowledged, is met with derision and false claims that the speaker is denial the existence of racism rather than just engaging in rational thought and considering the plausibility of various complex causal models of human behavior.
We see a manifestation of this here and in other threads where any mention of SES rather than racism as the proximal causal factor is attacked as though it is a denial of racism, rather than recognizing the various pathways by which racism can have an impact, which is critical for the efficacy for any efforts to change the outcome.

This sounds like you saying that no current racism exists at all and every problem is caused by some past, distant and now defunct racism.
I disagree that any rational reading of the current environment indicates an absence of current and ongoing racism.

He didn't say that at all. Not at all. Or are you purposefully giving him a case in point of what he is writing about in what you quoted?

Yes racism is real. No it is not the sole cause of every problem everywhere, and him mentioning that SES can be the primary cause of some isolated situations is not him "saying that no current racism exists and that every problem is caused by some past, distant and now defunct racism".

 

[Rhea]

When you ignore my posts above and insist on pushing these "white culture" and "black culture" memes, you deserve what you get.

I did not ignore your posts. I read them, reflected on them and thought for a while on them.
I do not agree with you that saying "both sides are to blame" is the most effective way to fix the problem.
So I won't be completely embracing your idea and posting all about that.

One part of this problem is denied and unaddressed. That is the actions that come from a segregated and nearly exclusive-white "culture. To deny that such a "white culture" exists in America is not reflective of reality, IMHO.

I live in a town that has One. Single. black family. (Whom virtually no one knows personally). This is a white culture, through and through. I do not accept your premise that both black and white (and brown and all) Americans share this culture. There are things we do that make other Americans say, "what? You what?" Most particularly Americans of other colors than white.

I can see this. I grew up in a town that also contained only One. Single. black family, but that town was only 30 minutes away from a major city (Boston) that bused colored students to our door for education (1970s). It was not a monolithic "American Culture."

I acknowledge that as a reality. I acknowledge that as part of the problem. This separated white culture needs to be acknowledged so that it can change, grown and widen to become part of the American Culture.

It is not already a fact, and that's why I disagree with your premise that we need to talk about it as one culture already. I believe that is too enabling of a "see? I have nothing to change, we're already equals, #AllLivesMatter and I have nothing to do about race" attitude.

IMHO.

 

[Rhea]

This sounds like you saying that no current racism exists at all and every problem is caused by some past, distant and now defunct racism.
I disagree that any rational reading of the current environment indicates an absence of current and ongoing racism.

He didn't say that at all. Not at all. Or are you purposefully giving him a case in point of what he is writing about in what you quoted?

Yes racism is real. No it is not the sole cause of every problem everywhere, and him mentioning that SES can be the primary cause of some isolated situations is not him "saying that no current racism exists and that every problem is caused by some past, distant and now defunct racism".

No I am not. He also said, "because history is already over and cannot be changed,"

History is not over. I am pointing out the flaw in his argument. These "proximal causes" are hardly the only problem facing us. Denying that more proximal causes are currently being created is folly.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

History is not over. I am pointing out the flaw in his argument. These "proximal causes" are hardly the only problem facing us. Denying that more proximal causes are currently being created is folly.

History is by definition over. That's what history is. I'll let him answer for himself, but I don't see anywhere in his post him writing that SES is the only problem facing us. Indeed, he seems to explicitly accept that racism continues to exist. He's just noting how some here will go off on people for mentioning SES or anything else that ins't racism and calling them racist or blind to racism for suggesting anything else could be involved.

 

[laughing dog]

He's just noting how some here will go off on people for mentioning SES or anything else that ins't racism and calling them racist or blind to racism for suggesting anything else could be involved.

That observation is a straw man propagated by a number of the apparent "it's anything but racism" crowd.

 

[Rhea]

History is not over. I am pointing out the flaw in his argument. These "proximal causes" are hardly the only problem facing us. Denying that more proximal causes are currently being created is folly.

History is by definition over. That's what history is. I'll let him answer for himself, but I don't see anywhere in his post him writing that SES is the only problem facing us. Indeed, he seems to explicitly accept that racism continues to exist. He's just noting how some here will go off on people for mentioning SES or anything else that ins't racism and calling them racist or blind to racism for suggesting anything else could be involved.

I disagree with your reading of his post.

Many generations of race-based mistreatment in the past is a distal and indirect cause of current criminal behavior that is mediated by the more proximal factors which include both SES and familial and cultural beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions inherently shaped by that history and which enable criminal behaviors.
White supremacists want to ignore this because history is still environment and and that undermines their efforts to make genetic causal attributions. Leftist activists, including many BLMers, want to ignore this implication because history is already over and cannot be changed, only the proximal causes can be changed and this explanation acknowledges that many of those reside in the the minds of black people themselves.

He makes no acknowledgement of ONGOING racism that creates SES inequality NOW. He explicitly denies it when he says that only proximal causes are available for change. I disagree. Current, ongoing racism must also be changed.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

"Anything but racism" denies the existence of racism not only as THE cause, but as A cause. It is a charge easily avoided. I do it all the time. "Yes Rosie, I know your supervisor is racist, sexist pig. But I also know that you were late twice last week, sneaked out early once the week before that, and were late with Cosgrove numbers causing a very important meeting to postponed and nearly losing that account. I know that account was thrown on your desk at the last minute and it wasn't fair and he probably did it to see you fail, but you did agree to take it on which makes you responsible. Tighten up your shit woman and stop running from this place, and when he steps over the line, document the action, with the names of witnesses present. If you want this shit to stop, first stop this passive/aggressive nonsense, get you own work in order, get evidence of harassment and abuse so when you make your report to HR, you have an actual case and your own hands are clean."

That was part a real conversation I had with an employee at a firm I was doing consulting for. I did not deny Rosie's lived experienced and by not making that denial, I was able to offer her advice on actions she could take that have nothing to do with his racism, but would better her job performance and stop the harassment.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I am a true outsider, so I think I can see this a little more objectively than either of the "sides" to this. I am not American. I am not white. I am not black.

What I see on both "sides" of this is people strongly identifying with their "side" and clinging to it. One wants racism to be over, wants to pretend it doesn't exist, wants to not be accused of being racist, and sees the other as pushing racism as the cause for everything and an excuse for everything. The other sees the troubled past with racism and the current racism, is faced with it frequently, sees it everywhere (even where it isn't), and sees the other as ignoring it or being blind to it, or in some cases encouraging it. Both make good points the other will never see because they don't want to or are afraid to. The real barrier is that both see the other as other and push to protect or get justice for their own "side". Tribalism runs in both directions here.

That is what needs to change. It isn't hard for a white person to see "white privilege" and feel sympathy for black people who are victims of racism and want to change that, if they have a black relative or close friend. And it isn't hard even if they don't, if you show it to them without haughty language, without pretending black people are immune from racist attitudes, and without further pushing the division of "You white people" (and your bad culture of evil) from "us black folk" (good victims who only do wrong because racism). Quit with the us vs them garbage, and you'll be amazed how much more effective you can be. The us vs them garbage is what the racists push, and by pushing it yourself, you only help them and hurt yourselves.

There is a real and legitimate defence mechanism some white people feel when you talk in such ways. They feel threatened. They feel you are going to accuse them of racism if they don't go along with whatever you say, and that is a real threat with power of social stigma, so they get their backs up, and they don't listen to you, form negative frames of mind about black people, and the cycle continues on. Of course white people have a lot less to lose with that social stigma than black people already suffer under existing racism, but it is a barrier nonetheless. And we should be knocking it down, not building it up.

When you say "Black Lives Matter", you say it because "it is assumed that white lives matter" or "society already knows that white lives matter" etc. When some white people see black people saying "Black lives matter" they assume the same tribalism that they themselves may have within them and they see Black people pushing for Black people, not for all people, not for inclusion and equality, but for themselves and only themselves. That encourages the already problematic sense of division and resentment. Also note how "Black Lives Matter" explicitly excludes the rest of us who are not white or black. We are often completely forgotten about in these race discussions in your country. Don't we have a role to play here? Don't other minorities matter? We should be allies. Why not make efforts to include us and speak about all humans working together to feel empathy and have justice and equality for all humans?

The way forward is to do as King did, and highlight our similarities, not our differences. King dreamt of the children of black and white people playing together, black and white people going to the same church, the same schools, etc. He had a dream about integration and equality regardless of colour. Push that. Push images of black people and white people hand in hand, and throw in the occasional Asian guy. Push interracial families. Highlight the racism and feelings that go with it, underscore the underlying bigotry, and help the white people relate that to their own lives. It shocks me that black people can be homophobes and that homosexuals can be racists. There seems to be no effort to recognize and understand bigotry at its base and to relate that with empathy to others. THAT is where we can combat a whole range of problems, from racism, to homophobia to sexism and beyond.

Doing that is not saying "I have nothing to change". That is making real change. And it is better than encouraging further division and spinning the cycle of racism.

 

[Rhea]

I am a true outsider, so I think I can see this a little more objectively than either of the "sides" to this. I am not American. I am not white. I am not black.

What I see on both "sides" of this is people strongly identifying with their "side" and clinging to it. One wants racism to be over, wants to pretend it doesn't exist, wants to not be accused of being racist, and sees the other as pushing racism as the cause for everything and an excuse for everything. The other sees the troubled past with racism and the current racism, is faced with it frequently, sees it everywhere (even where it isn't), and sees the other as ignoring it or being blind to it, or in some cases encouraging it. Both make good points the other will never see because they don't want to or are afraid to. The real barrier is that both see the other as other and push to protect or get justice for their own "side". Tribalism runs in both directions here.

That is what needs to change. It isn't hard for a white person to see "white privilege" and feel sympathy for black people who are victims of racism and want to change that, if they have a black relative or close friend. And it isn't hard even if they don't, if you show it to them without haughty language, without pretending black people are immune from racist attitudes, and without further pushing the division of "You white people" (and your bad culture of evil) from "us black folk" (good victims who only do wrong because racism). Quit with the us vs them garbage, and you'll be amazed how much more effective you can be. The us vs them garbage is what the racists push, and by pushing it yourself, you only help them and hurt yourselves.

There is a real and legitimate defence mechanism some white people feel when you talk in such ways. They feel threatened. They feel you are going to accuse them of racism if they don't go along with whatever you say, and that is a real threat with power of social stigma, so they get their backs up, and they don't listen to you, form negative frames of mind about black people, and the cycle continues on. Of course white people have a lot less to lose with that social stigma than black people already suffer under existing racism, but it is a barrier nonetheless. And we should be knocking it down, not building it up.

When you say "Black Lives Matter", you say it because "it is assumed that white lives matter" or "society already knows that white lives matter" etc. When some white people see black people saying "Black lives matter" they assume the same tribalism that they themselves may have within them and they see Black people pushing for Black people, not for all people, not for inclusion and equality, but for themselves and only themselves. That encourages the already problematic sense of division and resentment. Also note how "Black Lives Matter" explicitly excludes the rest of us who are not white or black. We are often completely forgotten about in these race discussions in your country. Don't we have a role to play here? Don't other minorities matter? We should be allies. Why not make efforts to include us and speak about all humans working together to feel empathy and have justice and equality for all humans?

The way forward is to do as King did, and highlight our similarities, not our differences. King dreamt of the children of black and white people playing together, black and white people going to the same church, the same schools, etc. He had a dream about integration and equality regardless of colour. Push that. Push images of black people and white people hand in hand, and throw in the occasional Asian guy. Push interracial families. Highlight the racism and feelings that go with it, underscore the underlying bigotry, and help the white people relate that to their own lives. It shocks me that black people can be homophobes and that homosexuals can be racists. There seems to be no effort to recognize and understand bigotry at its base and to relate that with empathy to others. THAT is where we can combat a whole range of problems, from racism, to homophobia to sexism and beyond.

Doing that is not saying "I have nothing to change". That is making real change. And it is better than encouraging further division and spinning the cycle of racism.

I wish that what you propose was the path. It would be awesome if it were. I'm not convinced it can avoid the "see, I'm not the problem" response.

By the way, I am white.

And I feel that when WHITE people say "black lives matter" it's the kind of conversation that finally does open some eyes. Yes, as you say, there is defensiveness. And so when those people who are white who have acquired empathy (the complete kind, that understands the pain and problem and wants to fix it) start being the ones to speak the words that call out racism, the ones who join the chorus of believing that black lives have not been mattering and need to start, I believe that kind of conversation helps. It breaks down the defenses because it suggests that it's an objective view, and is not instantly categorized as tribe.

And that's why I speak up, even though it sometimes causes discomfort. I don't have a black best friend. I don't even have a black close friend who is local. The most I can claim is that I have a dear and close online friend who is black. I do have a cousin who is black, although I only see their family occasionally. What I feel is a thing that I feel because of observations of people who are complete strangers to me. I watch the young black man in the hotel lobby face discrimination right there. I watch a black man face discrimination at work. I watch what's happening around me and also in news - the language newscasters use, the pictures and headlines in the paper.

I do truly feel this way because I am an American feeling empathy for my fellow Americans. (A human caring for fellow humans). And yet, it's pretty clear that what's hitting them again and again is not "American" culture. It's coming from a particular area.

You ask why other minorities are not included. My personal answer is that they are not victimized to anywhere near the extent with the exception of Native Americans and I feel equally strongly about that discrimination. My answer is that I care about it all and seek to act most on the most egregious as it appears on my radar.

I'd love for it to be all one culture healing itself. But until we can acknowledge that a white "side" has been systematically discriminating I don't see how we can convince those whites to admit even to themselves that they have done anything that needs to change. And hence they will not change.

I call out the flaws of white culture because in my view it has been harmful and needs to change. Whether black culture ever changes also is completely irrelevant, IMHO, to the need for white culture to change. Although it is my opinion that when white culture changes, we will _become_ one culture and work together on what remains.

My target: Problems that I think underlie the others. They happen to be on "my side." They also happen to be problems that need me in getting solved. I believe it requires white voices. I have a white voice. I want to use it. So that's my focus.

 

[ronburgundy]

I disagree. Current, ongoing and destructive racism continues to exist in housing, lending and hiring. Not to mention education and medical services.

So, you disagree that history happened in the past? You are not referring to history, by definition, you are referring to events currently happening. Those events can be similar, and the past events can cause the present ones, but those past event are, by definition, over. The entire point of my post is that it is critical to distinguish the distal from proximal causes, if trying to affect change in the current situation. Your reply shows you don't grasp this basic fact.

The fact that their is also current racism is not denied by anything I said, nor does it undermine anything I said.

Also, do most people without health coverage or who cannot get a loan go out an rape and shoot other people? If not, then those factors come up light years short of accounting for the racial disparities in violent crimes, which include not merely economic related crimes but violent assaults in general, including rape.

only the proximal causes can be changed and this explanation acknowledges that many of those reside in the the minds of black people themselves. When the political goal is not to fix the problem of crime disparities, but to attack racism, then any explanation that doesn't presume racism as the most immediate and thus "fixable" cause is ignored or actively denied.

It is not ignored or denied. Adviocating for drug rehab instead of jail is part of this ongoing and actual acceptance of the symptoms of the previous racism that need to be addressed to fix the problem of disparity.

The fact that sometimes, some people selectively argue to acknowledge some of the effects of history in order to reduce punishments does nothing to counter my claim that many of these effects are often ignored or denied when it suits agendas for blame current racism rather than reduce the problem outcome. Such cherry picking of when and what aspect of these effects they acknowledge just shows that it isn't ignorance, but willful intellectual dishonesty when they do ignore these effects, such as when denying the massive evidence of greater violent crime (of nearly every category) among blacks, even above what is predicted by any measureable SES factors.

I am all for drug rehab when addiction by itself can account for the crime, but it cannot in most cases, outside of things that shouldn't be crimes in the first place, like drug use or distribution.

Most leftists consider a two-tier approach:
Attack the racism that continues to exist. Make it so that we don't create new dysfuntion.
Attack the symptoms of the previous racism. Make it so that the current dysfunction is treated and eliminated.

So you and they always fully accept the reality crime-enabling and violence promoting beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions that are more prevalent in the black community and cause them to be more likely to engage in serious harmful acts towards others, independent of other effects of economic need or drug dependence?

IF not, then you absolutely are ignoring the reality of critical pathways by which historical events leads to current crime disparities.

Also, your phrasing shows efforts to deny the critical causal role crime-enabling beliefs, attitudes, an dispositions. These are more than "symptoms". They are the most direct causes of the criminal actions and prior racism is only one of many more distal factors that unreliably contributes to these direct causes. These psychological dispositions are causes of violence and criminality just as much as racist beliefs are causes of racist behavior. Sure, the beliefs themselves are caused by more distal factors, but they still the proximal causes of the racist behaviors, and it would be misleading at best to refer to them a mere "symptoms", which would make all causes of all things after the big bang, mere symptoms.

We see this all the time, including on this board, every time statistical differences in traffic stops, searches, or arrests are used as evidence of racism on the part of the officers involved in those interactions. That invalid inference presumes no actual difference in behaviors that would warrant stops, searches, or arrests. When this objection is raised, the response is usually "So, you are saying that black people are inherently more criminal?". That response shows myopic denial of the impact of historical events on current conditions and psychology that produces the unlawful behaviors.

]No.
Studies are pretty clear that two people committing the same crime will have different outcomes based only on their skin color.
Also studies are quite clear that two people doing nothing wrong at all will have different outcomes based only on their skin color.

True, and some of those studies show blacks getting treated better because they are black (not including affirmative action policies which are defined as differential treatment based on skin color). Regardless, and once again, nothing I said denies actual current racism, but rather acknowledges the other proximal causes of past racism that you and others try to discount or ignore, which is exactly what you did by discounting SES, and what many here do when they pretend that blacks don't commit more violence and thus falsely infer police racism because blacks are arrested more often.

This isn't an invalid inference. Not matter how many times you want to say that there must be some cause other than racism.

IOW, you are, right here, denying that there is any other cause besides racism. You are a poster child for exactly what I am talking about. In contrast, I don't at all deny the causal role of racism. I merely acknowledge the critical difference between proximal racism by the other participants in current interactions and the distal impact of past racism that is actually mediated by the more direct cause of the motives and disposition of the criminal themselves and the people in their community that most directly socialized them.

When SES is controlled for, it STILL shows up as based on skin color.

??? Are you saying that blacks still show greater crime rates when SES is controlled for? I agree and so do the facts. SES is only a partial mediator between being black in America and greater likelihood of engaging in crime and violence. Experiences of current racism is a portion of the rest, but so is greater socialized violence within families, and crime enabling beliefs and attitudes that form a kind of culture that makes criminal actions more likely. Also, SES is not a "symptom" but also a proximal cause of criminality, which is why even within any individual race, SES still predicts criminality.

It is at the heart of the whole strawman "anything but racism" meme, in which any effort to identify actual proximal causes other than direct racism of the people involved, even when the distal causes of past racism are explicitly acknowledged, is met with derision and false claims that the speaker is denial the existence of racism rather than just engaging in rational thought and considering the plausibility of various complex causal models of human behavior.
We see a manifestation of this here and in other threads where any mention of SES rather than racism as the proximal causal factor is attacked as though it is a denial of racism, rather than recognizing the various pathways by which racism can have an impact, which is critical for the efficacy for any efforts to change the outcome.

This sounds like you saying that no current racism exists at all and every problem is caused by some past, distant and now defunct racism.

Nothing I said sounds to any minimally competent English speaker like I am denying the existence of current racism. In fact, my underlined statement above very explicitly states that your strawman interpretation is false and that what I am arguing for does not at all deny the causal role of current racism.
I merely acknowledge that current racism is not the sole causal factor. Belief that current racism is the sole causal factor in all outcome disparities is the logically necessary assumption underlying efforts to use particular outcome disparities as evidence of current racism, as is often done with arrest stats, rates of being shot by cops, etc.. In fact, this denial of any causes but current racism is applied to all racial disparities, such as with unspecified "too few" numbers of black vendors at the St. Paul fair, which BLM drones blindly presume without any other facts that this shows racism by those awarding the slots.

 

[ronburgundy]

History is by definition over. That's what history is. I'll let him answer for himself, but I don't see anywhere in his post him writing that SES is the only problem facing us. Indeed, he seems to explicitly accept that racism continues to exist. He's just noting how some here will go off on people for mentioning SES or anything else that ins't racism and calling them racist or blind to racism for suggesting anything else could be involved.

I disagree with your reading of his post.

Many generations of race-based mistreatment in the past is a distal and indirect cause of current criminal behavior that is mediated by the more proximal factors which include both SES and familial and cultural beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions inherently shaped by that history and which enable criminal behaviors.
White supremacists want to ignore this because history is still environment and and that undermines their efforts to make genetic causal attributions. Leftist activists, including many BLMers, want to ignore this implication because history is already over and cannot be changed, only the proximal causes can be changed and this explanation acknowledges that many of those reside in the the minds of black people themselves.

He makes no acknowledgement of ONGOING racism that creates SES inequality NOW. He explicitly denies it when he says that only proximal causes are available for change. I disagree. Current, ongoing racism must also be changed.

See above response for more detail, but you are completely wrong and illogical in your misinterpretation of my post. Jolly has it correct. Current racism is, by definition, not history, but current and proximal. Thus, current racism can and should be changed. However, if you had genie and eliminated it and racist institutions over night, it would only partly diminish the greater crime rates for blacks which would continue for many generations, because that current racism is only a portion of the proximal causes.

 

[Rhea]

This isn't an invalid inference. Not matter how many times you want to say that there must be some cause other than racism

.
IOW, you are, right here, denying that there is any other cause besides racism. You are a poster child for exactly what I am talking about.

No, no, no.

I'm not going to do this point by point because you have misread my entire post.
When I said you want to say there must be some cause other than racism, I was stating that you were looking for a cause that does not include racism.

I believe the causes for greater reported crime rates include racism AND the effects of past racism.
You keep making the claim that "lefties" "always" deny any cause besides racism.
This is not true, as you have seen me post wanting to change BOTH the crime statistic results that are from current racist enforcement statistics and the crime statistic results that are actual crime rate difference and are ALSO based on racism, but racism of the past.


As I said,
Racism causes poverty, which leads to more frequent violence
Racism causes stress so high that PTSD like symptoms, including violence will likely appear.
Racism also causes medical assaults (such as lead poisoning, nutrition problems, etc) that are also likely to increase violence
Racism causes feelings of hopelessness that lead to higher incidences of violence.
AND
Racism causes police to call things violence that are not called violence elsewhere
Racism causes an increase in arrest records that have nothing to do with actual crime differences, exacerbating both the numbers and the poverty, stress and hopelessness that in turn create more violence.

Many of those are past racism. Some of them are current racism that will become the past racism as soon as the sun sets on another day.
All of them are wrong.
Some are fixed by stopping the racism of discriminatory arrest rates.
Some are fixed by treating the trauma of the previous racism.
All need fixing.
None of these have anything to do with genetics, by the way.

In you last post you sound like you agree with me. That some of those statistics are just bullshit racist arrests targeting black people for things that white people get off scot-free for. And that some of those statistics are due to the reactions of any people to the kinds of stressors that racism via violence, economics, injustice and education will certainly increase in any population.

 

[ApostateAbe]

at 29:44, there is an explanation you won't want to miss.

The hypothesis at 29:44 is that the justice system, that unfairly targeted blacks, created a criminal culture among blacks that still persists. One problem with this hypothesis is that the high crime rate among blacks is not an uniquely American phenomenon, but it exists wherever both blacks and other races exist and where the statistics have been collected, including Canada, Britain, Brazil, Hawaii, and South Africa. The hypothesis also lacks explanatory power. As the racial pattern of crime is cross-national, and as the antisocial/criminal behavior variations are largely genetic, the best explanation seems to be that the racial differences are genetic.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

at 29:44, there is an explanation you won't want to miss.

The hypothesis at 29:44 is that the justice system, that unfairly targeted blacks, created a criminal culture among blacks that still persists. One problem with this hypothesis is that the high crime rate among blacks is not an uniquely American phenomenon, but it exists wherever both blacks and other races exist and where the statistics have been collected, including Canada, Britain, Brazil, Hawaii, and South Africa. The hypothesis also lacks explanatory power. As the racial pattern of crime is cross-national, and as the antisocial/criminal behavior variations are largely genetic, the best explanation seems to be that the racial differences are genetic.

What is and is not a crime is completely determined by law, not genetics.

Who is and is not prosecuted for crime is determined by how and against whom that law is enforced, not genetics.

So once again, FAIL.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The hypothesis also lacks explanatory power. As the racial pattern of crime is cross-national, and as the antisocial/criminal behavior variations are largely genetic, the best explanation seems to be that the racial differences are genetic.

Do you have evidence for this or is this just your theory? And if this were so, why do you think this would be? Separate evolution favouring antisocial behaviour? Why?

 

[ApostateAbe]

The hypothesis also lacks explanatory power. As the racial pattern of crime is cross-national, and as the antisocial/criminal behavior variations are largely genetic, the best explanation seems to be that the racial differences are genetic.

Do you have evidence for this or is this just your theory? And if this were so, why do you think this would be? Separate evolution favouring antisocial behaviour? Why?

It is established fact that antisocial/criminal behavior is largely heritable within groups, and it is established fact that races vary in their criminal behavior, with black Africans being more criminal among many nations and across time. There is no established explanation for why the racial differences exist, only unsettled hypotheses, but I will tell you the hypothesis I prefer. Within each human mind, there are two psychological forces at odds with each other but both providing selective advantage: cooperativeness and competitiveness. The cooperative psychology means that you work together with other people in your tribe, be accepted, and build a strong clan. The competitive psychology means you break the rules, humiliate, intimidate, hurt or kill your competitors, steal their belongings, and rape their women. Someone who is always cooperative is abused and under-respected. Someone who is always competitive is killed in retribution or self-defense. Nobody is completely at either end of the spectrum, but some people are more cooperative and others more competitive. The competitive psychology tends to lend sexual advantage to males, as human females are attracted to males of greatest competitive advantage, the "bad boys." Why the racial differences? I expect it is because of racial differences in mating histories. Monogamy is selected in cooperative societies, so few men are without a mate, and cooperative societies would be selected in cold climates with scarce resources: survival happens only if the clan works together. Monogamy places less selection pressure on males, more on females, but polygyny (many women for a single man) places more selection pressure on males, less on females. Black Africans were most polygynous, Europeans were less polygynous and more monogamous, and Asians were least polygynous and most monogamous. This is J. Philippe Rushton's general theory of the races.

 

[Derec]

One wants racism to be over, wants to pretend it doesn't exist, wants to not be accused of being racist, and sees the other as pushing racism as the cause for everything and an excuse for everything.

I would hope all people would want racism to be over. Of course, there is still racism, but there is much less of it than the activists love to claim. I think some people jsut want to be activists and thus pretend nothing changed since the civil rights movement so they can recreate those days with marches, so-called "direct action" etc. If white racism was as big a problem as activists love to claim it is, why the need to invent ridiculous concepts like microagressions?
On the other hand, black racism largely gets a pass. I already mentioned the CBS-owned black radio station here in Atlanta whose hosts are blatantly racist. A white radio station exhibiting similar levels of racism would have been pulled off the air very quickly. Also people like Farrakhan don't get nearly as much scorn and derision as white racists.

That is what needs to change. It isn't hard for a white person to see "white privilege" and feel sympathy for black people who are victims of racism and want to change that, if they have a black relative or close friend.

Do you think there is such think as "black privilege" as well? I think the whole concept of one-sided privileges is not very useful as the existence of opposite privilege (there is also female privilege for example) is usually viciously denied.

The way forward is to do as King did, and highlight our similarities, not our differences. King dreamt of the children of black and white people playing together, black and white people going to the same church, the same schools, etc. He had a dream about integration and equality regardless of colour. Push that.

I agree with that. Unfortunately things that emphasize that like saying "there is only one race, the human race" are considered "microaggressions". The order of the day on the Left is emphasizing racial differences and setting them in stone through the dominant paradigm of "identity politics".