Racism - Ignored?

  • Thread starter Thread starter s0nny80y
  • 775 comments
  • 40,992 views
dautolover
http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gan...-receive-60-longer-sentences-for-same-crimes/

"A new study by M. Marit Rehavi of the University of British Columbia and Sonja B. Starr of the University of Michigan Law School shows that Black Americans receive almost 60% long prison sentences than white Americans who committed the same crime."

... It's not just about the words. This thing really exists...
Click to expand...
Which doesn't give the full story. If you move on to the source article it clearly states.
The report concludes that sentence disparities “can be almost completely explained by three factors: the original arrest offense, the defendant’s criminal history, and the prosecutor’s initial choice of charges.
Click to expand...
All these factors will lead to those being arrested not receiving lighter sentences because of first-offence circumstances.
 
I agree with above^^^
It is easy to make a report say whatever you want it to by either editing or taking some parts and not others. It is a fact that we are all different, races/nationalities and even regions. We are all at least a little bit racist by todays standards in the way that we want the best for our own societies/cultures/peoples.
There are a lot of interesting points in this thread 👍
 
Last edited:
Y
ExigeEvan
Which doesn't give the full story. If you move on to the source article it clearly states.

All these factors will lead to those being arrested not receiving lighter sentences because of first-offence circumstances.
Click to expand...

The report concludes that sentence disparities “can be almost completely explained by three factors: the original arrest offense, the defendant’s criminalhistory,and the prosecutor’s initial choice of charges.
Click to expand...

These things are part of the picture of racism as well. Why, for instance, would a prosecutor wish to file charges in disparate manners? Why not prosecute equally? And as for criminal history... well neighborhoods with a large black population are more heavily policed than their white counterparts. They're bound to come across the police more often than whites.h

I would also say that disparities are affected by the very nature of the justice system. Blacks are most likely going to depend on an overburdened public defense attorney, who could not give the best adequate representantation. Private attorneys may have the time and may be paid even more... Higher incentives, higher effectiveness.

The report never controlled for these three factors. If they did, they would have probably ended up with the same results.

There's a PBS documentary that talks about this, but in relation to juveniles. Black juveniles were disproportionately tried as adults, whereas their white counterparts were given a second chance, even if the crime was equally horrendous. I'm using my phone right now, so I cant give you guys the link... I'll put it up once I get access to a computer.
 
Q.Why are mainly black neighbourhoods more heavily policed?
A.Because they have more crimes committed per head of population in those areas.

Wouldnt it be worse not to police these areas heavily? Surely the victims of the crimes are more important than the criminals themselves?
 
Sorry for not having read in this thread before, but since yesterday this bugs me:

Luxembourg is accused of racism and I do not get it (being a strong fighter against racism and finding that all should recognise they are racist and have to do effort not act on it): The points brought forward are:
1) Students from foreign origin have more issues in education, certainly when they come from outside of the EU.
2) Unemployment is mainly with foreigners.
3) It is difficult to get Luxembourgish nationality, the language exam is too difficult.
4) It is too difficult to get housing.

My view on this points:
1) The level of students in studies is considered low in Luxembourg; a cause is that education is done in Luxembourgish, German and French; mandatory for all. It is clear if you speak only russian at home that you have little chance to succeed. But why would Luxembourg change their system for the foreigners?
2) Many Luxembourgers are working for the state, the people in private companies are for a large part foreigners, so bankruptcy hits mainly the foreigners. An other point is that many job offers are for high qualified jobs, where many unemployed are illiterate (construction workers etc). You can not force a service society to create jobs for the non educated.
3) I can follow conversations in Luxembourgish, because I do speak German, French and Dutch and did the effort to learn some Luxembourgish. Speaking is difficult, I generally go back to German or French. To limit your nationality to people that understand the political debate (parliament speaks in Luxembourgish but notes are in French) seems a right for a state. There is no need to change nationality to work here.
4) The Luxembourgers complain about this as well, it is the rich foreigners (like my wife and my neighbors) that make that prices are so high, this has nothing to do with racism.

Conclusion: I do agree it is difficult to integrate in Luxembourg with your family, but it is not due to racism, Luxembourg is just complicated, certainly for the poor.
 
A TV news reporter uses quotes the N-word on live TV.

See, this is the kind of crap that spurs on racism. This is the kind of news story that perpetuates racism and guarantees that it will never go away. And it's from The Daily Caller, a news source connected to Jack Hunter, whom is connected to Ron Paul, and therefore I'm very disappointed in The Daily Caller for publishing such a crude, pointless story.

It's a whole three paragraphs and a video about a completely irrelevant quotation of another person's words. Why is this news?
 
Keef
See, this is the kind of crap that spurs on racism.
Click to expand...

Where I do believe that words do hurt, I also want to encourage people to confront people that are hurting them with words and explain both what they really see behind the word.

There is a large difference between using "politically correct" language and having a behavior that respects rights.

Keef
Ron Paul
Click to expand...

I read about some of Ron Paul's actions, like voting against "hate crimes" laws. The reason was the correct reason, all people are alike, so why would one crime be more punished then an other.

=> stressing political correctness can lead to having the impression we should all be the same, we are not we are all different, but we have the same rights.
 
Racism will always exist as long as we remain "biologically human". Meaning as long as we are born from a mother's womb. It is a human example of natural wish to dominate. So let me explain this a bit further.

A man of one color wants domination of the man of the opposite color. He rarely shows aggression toward females of other colors. Nature does the same thing in animal world in more simplistic way. A male wants to dominate other males to have access to all other females. In human world is not only access to females but domination brings wealth and "good life" so to speak (on general level of course, not to every single unit of particular race).

In human world the desire to dominate over other males is equal in all races. For example it is not true that white man wants to dominate the black man more than the black man wants to dominate the white man. But this "aggression" is in overwhelming number of cases a man vs. man. History has proved that white man has not much against black, Asian, or Indian women. On the contrary he doesn't object being around them at all. Same can be true for black males who may despise white men but certainly do not despise their women.

As time goes by humans evolve but inborn traits cannot be deleted by surroundings and circumstances, no matter how perfect they are. There will always be constant friction between males as long as we are born as humans. When they start producing us on a factory line like cars then this way of domination might cease to exist.
 
aragonz
Racism will always exist as long as we remain "biologically human". Meaning as long as we are born from a mother's womb. It is a human example of natural wish to dominate. So let me explain this a bit further.

A man of one color wants domination of the man of the opposite color. He rarely shows aggression toward females of other colors. Nature does the same thing in animal world in more simplistic way. A male wants to dominate other males to have access to all other females. In human world is not only access to females but domination brings wealth and "good life" so to speak (on general level of course, not to every single unit of particular race).

In human world the desire to dominate over other males is equal in all races. For example it is not true that white man wants to dominate the black man more than the black man wants to dominate the white man. But this "aggression" is in overwhelming number of cases a man vs. man. History has proved that white man has not much against black, Asian, or Indian women. On the contrary he doesn't object being around them at all. Same can be true for black males who may despise white men but certainly do not despise their women.

As time goes by humans evolve but inborn traits cannot be deleted by surroundings and circumstances, no matter how perfect they are. There will always be constant friction between males as long as we are born as humans. When they start producing us on a factory line like cars then this way of domination might cease to exist.
Click to expand...

This guy talks a lot of sense^^^

Everyone is racist, just to different degrees depending on various factors. It could be said that it is a completely natural thing to be so.
 
aragonz
Racism will always exist as long as we remain "biologically human". Meaning as long as we are born from a mother's womb. It is a human example of natural wish to dominate. So let me explain this a bit further.

A man of one color wants domination of the man of the opposite color. He rarely shows aggression toward females of other colors. Nature does the same thing in animal world in more simplistic way. A male wants to dominate other males to have access to all other females. In human world is not only access to females but domination brings wealth and "good life" so to speak (on general level of course, not to every single unit of particular race).

In human world the desire to dominate over other males is equal in all races. For example it is not true that white man wants to dominate the black man more than the black man wants to dominate the white man. But this "aggression" is in overwhelming number of cases a man vs. man. History has proved that white man has not much against black, Asian, or Indian women. On the contrary he doesn't object being around them at all. Same can be true for black males who may despise white men but certainly do not despise their women.

As time goes by humans evolve but inborn traits cannot be deleted by surroundings and circumstances, no matter how perfect they are. There will always be constant friction between males as long as we are born as humans. When they start producing us on a factory line like cars then this way of domination might cease to exist.
Click to expand...

berty1979
This guy talks a lot of sense^^^

Everyone is racist, just to different degrees depending on various factors. It could be said that it is a completely natural thing to be so.
Click to expand...

No he doesn't. He's using pseudo-scentific nonsense in an attempt to justify racism.

He's taken the pack 'alpha' male concept and attempted to use it to justify racism, when 'alpha' male (or female in some cases or both as in case of Wolves) is totally colour blind. Its a dominance trait designed to lead a pack and as such doesn't care what the colour of a person/animal is.

Feral dogs in cities exhibit this quite clearly in that packs will consist of a wide range of breads (so if 'race' was an issue in this then it would not occur) and will assign both leadership and role based 'jobs' none of which have anything to do with 'race' at all.

The animal kingdom does not work in the manner in which aragonz woudl like you to believe at all.


Scaff
 
Scaff
No he doesn't. He's using pseudo-scentific nonsense in an attempt to justify racism.

He's taken the pack 'alpha' male concept and attempted to use it to justify racism, when 'alpha' male (or female in some cases or both as in case of Wolves) is totally colour blind. Its a dominance trait designed to lead a pack and as such doesn't care what the colour of a person/animal is.

Feral dogs in cities exhibit this quite clearly in that packs will consist of a wide range of breads (so if 'race' was an issue in this then it would not occur) and will assign both leadership and role based 'jobs' none of which have anything to do with 'race' at all.

The animal kingdom does not work in the manner in which aragonz woudl like you to believe at all.

Scaff
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you Scaff!
 
Scaff
No he doesn't. He's using pseudo-scentific nonsense in an attempt to justify racism.

He's taken the pack 'alpha' male concept and attempted to use it to justify racism, when 'alpha' male (or female in some cases or both as in case of Wolves) is totally colour blind. Its a dominance trait designed to lead a pack and as such doesn't care what the colour of a person/animal is.

Feral dogs in cities exhibit this quite clearly in that packs will consist of a wide range of breads (so if 'race' was an issue in this then it would not occur) and will assign both leadership and role based 'jobs' none of which have anything to do with 'race' at all.

The animal kingdom does not work in the manner in which aragonz woudl like you to believe at all.


Scaff
Click to expand...

^ This
 
Racism is natural as well as its inverse admitting inferiority, e.g. in work ethic. But, those biases should take the back seat to reasoning and communication.
 
AlexGTV
Racism is natural as well as its inverse admitting inferiority, e.g. in work ethic. But, those biases should take the back seat to reasoning and communication.
Click to expand...

I don't agree at all, racism is a product of fear and ignorance, I've never seen a single piece of evidence to support the claim that racism is natural at all.


Scaff
 
I should add, "to a degree". It's not just fear and ignorance. Its root is cultural misunderstanding but also cultural priorities.

I've frequently had a negative outlook on people because they spoke loud or careless and turned out to be excellent personalities. On the other hand, positive first (even graceful appeareance and gestures) impression gave away to less than that.

I've worked on a money exhange shop with all kinds of people around the world. As an educated person, and really appraising a neutral stance, I still could not help but observe how for example Indian people are polite and patient while people from middle africa typically impatient and demanding, as if I owe them something.
Despite that, I understand they might be under stress as they are so different in appearance and is the explanation I give more so than they are egoistic e.t.c.
 
AlexGTV
Racism is natural as well as its inverse admitting inferiority, e.g. in work ethic. But, those biases should take the back seat to reasoning and communication.
Click to expand...

You're argument seems to be mixing race and culture. I can see people disliking a culture (don't agree they should), but not the color, creed or race of the person. Your idea is like saying all blacks are prone to commit crimes and thus be careful of them.

Reality is, that it's the situation these people grow up in, don't hate the person for being born a certain color or race. That is unfounded to hate in such away. I don't hate gangs because I think black people are full of them, I dislike gangs because it is a stupid life to live. However, your idea seems to have it the other way around.

AlexGTV
I should add, "to a degree". It's not just fear and ignorance. Its root is cultural misunderstanding but also cultural priorities.
Click to expand...

You just proved me right. To an extent
 
^But I see it unavoidable where cultural priorities differ for racism not to occur. It is when you see things in a broader viewpoint and foster communication that racism is controlled if not diminished greatly.

The first step to fight racism is to acknowledge it.
 
AlexGTV
I should add, "to a degree". It's not just fear and ignorance. Its root is cultural misunderstanding but also cultural priorities.
Click to expand...
None of which is 'natural', culture is fluid, it can and does change over time. Which is quite different to linking something to a natural prerogative that can't be changed.



AlexGTV
I've worked on a money exhange shop with all kinds of people around the world. As an educated person, and really appraising a neutral stance, I still could not help but observe how for example Indian people are polite and patient while people from middle africa typically impatient and demanding, as if I owe them something.
Despite that, I understand they might be under stress as they are so different in appearance and is the explanation I give more so than they are egoistic e.t.c.
Click to expand...
I've worked with enough people from around the world to understand that most cultural stereotypes are just that, and often are little more than our own projections onto people.

You could encounter a lot of culture 'X' behaving no differently to anyone else and it doesn't register, the second they act in a cultural script you tie it to the stereotype and re-enforce it.

My mother in law is Indian and while she is more certainly capable of being polite, she's also capable of being narrow minded and massively impatient, just like anyone is.



AlexGTV
^But I see it unavoidable where cultural priorities differ for racism not to occur. It is when you see things in a broader viewpoint and foster communication that racism is controlled if not diminished greatly.

The first step to fight racism is to acknowledge it.
Click to expand...
I quite agree that we need to acknowledge it, but its certainly not the inevitable outcome of cultural differences as you seem to be implying here.


Scaff
 
Last edited:
The other issue I see, is people allow others to perpetuate this idea of how certain races will act based on a culture that those races may not even acknolwedge or follow. Thus as Scaff said, you end up with your foot in your mouth cause you judged before even knowing.

I think if people put aside what they hear and go learn first hand we wouldn't be having this discussion. However, reality is many here and other places live a nice bubble thus being ignorant and coming up with idea that everyone is races to some degree, to justify there lack of learning and growing.
 
Scaff
You could encounter a lot of culture 'X' behaving no differently to anyone else and it doesn't register, the second they act in a cultural script you tie it to the stereotype and re-enforce it.
Scaff
Click to expand...

That is valid, but I have accounted for it and still found out stereotypes that are true. Myself I like the cultural differences and feel that they make me a better person and able to understand cultures better and see the broad similarities.

But people who don't have much contact with different cultures, have much less tolerance and in that sense it is "natural" for them to be to a degree racist. It is the lifestyle more than any author, demagog or lobby that determines the predisposition towards racism.
 
I'd say the cultural issues being discussed in relation to racism are off base simply because racism is the practice of prejudicial behavior based on race.
When we speak of culture we are speaking of ethnicity which is this case will probably come back to ethnocentrism but lets at least try to keep the terms inline with the subject of discussion.

Simply put... Racism is based on race, not culture.
If it was culture then racism would not occur within the same socio-economic levels.

That said, cultural stereo-types certainly can re-enforce racist beliefs.
 
Okay, if we are to take racism as a negative bias because of appearance, I can say I naturally find women that are not caucasian in general less interesting. Am I being racist?
 
Kent
I'd say the cultural issues being discussed in relation to racism are off base simply because racism is the practice of prejudicial behavior based on race.
When we speak of culture we are speaking of ethnicity which is this case will probably come back to ethnocentrism but lets at least try to keep the terms inline with the subject of discussion.

Simply put... Racism is based on race, not culture.
If it was culture then racism would not occur within the same socio-economic levels.

That said, cultural stereo-types certainly can re-enforce racist beliefs.
Click to expand...

So culture does help project racism but isn't racism? What...

Also the way some explain racism is more culture based than color/race based, thus this will come up because as I just showed with AlexGTV they do go hand in hand.
 
AlexGTV
Okay, if we are to take racism as a negative bias because of appearance, I can say I naturally find women that are not caucasian in general less interesting. Am I being racist?
Click to expand...

A difficult one, it sounds like preference to a degree (I prefer dark hair to blondes for example), however it would depend on exactly what you mean by 'interesting'.

If we take it in the literal term then I don't myself see how someone's race could make them more or less interesting, plenty of boring people of all races.

If you are referring to interest as in attraction then its possible its simply a preference issue, but once again I personally don't see how race affects that. I've found women of all races both attractive and unattractive, the race has never been a deciding factor in that.


Scaff
 
(Student) First name, Last name, Princeton class of 2013, was wrongfully arrested and incarcerated Saturday night while sitting on a porch drinking water waiting for his friends to arrive. When he saw the police, he got up and entered his friends' house and called her. She immediately called the police and asked what the problem was. They said "A black male is on your property." She assured them that he was their guest. She told (Student) to go back out on the porch and tell them he was a guest. When he went out the door, they yanked him out the door, handcuffed him and arrested him for "obstruction of justice." He was stripped, showered and put in an orange jumper. It took him 8 hours to get in touch with any of his family. He is traumatized and violated.
Click to expand...
A student from my university was arrested(not on campus) for "looking suspicious." Is this ridiculous or is this ridiculous....First Trayvon Martin then I hear this from a member of my school. When will racism stop?
We aren't sure of the location of the arrest and the finer details but do you guys think racism was involved?
I think it was.
 
Blaze_409
Is this ridiculous or is this ridiculous....
We aren't sure of the location of the arrest and the finer details but do you guys think racism was involved?
I think it was.
Click to expand...

So do you know anything about the case? For instance if the person arrested was even a different race than the arresting officer?

Oddly enough, why does this case get no attention from the media at all?
 
Hate crime laws in the UK dont apply to everyone which is why they are so unjust.
A group of white kids beat up an asian kid and its a hate crime. Switch that around and its an 'assault' or GBH/ABH.
 
berty1979
Hate crime laws in the UK dont apply to everyone which is why they are so unjust.
A group of white kids beat up an asian kid and its a hate crime. Switch that around and its an 'assault' or GBH/ABH.
Click to expand...

Took me all of 10 seconds on google:

Two youths were allegedly attacked by a gang of Asian youths in Market Street on 4 February.

A 21-year-old man has been charged with assault causing grievous bodily harm while two other 17-year-olds and another 21-year-old have been released on police bail until 23 April.

Police are treating the incident as a hate crime because the teenager believes it was racially motivated.
Click to expand...

Source - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17095923

and

A teenager was left for dead after being chased and savagely beaten by a gang of Asians in a suspected racist attack.....

....Police say there is no evidence of provocation and are treating the attack as a serious hate crime.
Click to expand...
Source - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...me-attack-Asian-gang-left-fighting-sight.html

The police in the UK actually have a good track record of treating truly racist attacks as hate crimes, regardless of the race of those who perpetrate them all illustrated by the Hate Crime report 2008.

Ethnicity
Ethnicity data on defendants is collected by the CPS in accordance with the agreed Criminal Justice System definitions for the 16+1 ethnic categories. In 2007-08, 78% of hate crime defendants were identified as belonging to the White British category, and 81% were categorised as White. 5% of defendants were identified as Asian, and a further 5% were identified as Black. 4% of defendants did not state an ethnicity on arrest.
Click to expand...
Source - http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/CPS_hate_crime_report_2008.pdf Page 14

Now the UK ethnicity has the White British group at 88% of the population based on the 2001 census which actually puts the split of Hate crime charges roughly in line with population split.

Sorry but you statement doesn't actually match the reality of the situation.


Scaff
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back