A Navy Veteran’s perspective on racism

[Deleted member 28227]

Many are claiming the systems are racist. It just needs to be understood who runs those systems and who has run those systems for 50+ years. If the system is racist it is because the democratic mayors, city councils, and police chiefs have been hiring racist cops and implementing racist policy. Who else would be to blame?

"It just needs to be understood who runs those systems and who has run those systems for 50+ years."

White people, mostly.

The most overtly racist leaders were Southern Democrats, they switched to the Republic party eventually.

There are been lots of well meaning politicians that enforced or enacted very problematic laws. Kamala Harris is catching heat for her roll as the AG and DA, for example.

R and D don't really matter much in this conversation, IMHO.

 

[FLS]

Who knew fly fishermen were such assholes???
Seriously, I’m the minority where I live, rural SC is mostly black, our county is about 50/50. There are still a few hateful rednecks that hate blacks , and some blacks that hate whites. Mostly people get along and are more concerned with the struggles of everyday life.
Minorities got the shitty end of the stick around here for a long time. Systemic racism was the reality. Thankfully the generation that did that is about gone. Every generation has gotten more tolerant, but I don’t think racism will ever be gone completely. That’s not human nature.
I believe the current unrest is justified, the destruction is not. Bad actors with dark motives fanning the flames to take advantage of the situation.

 

[Doublecluck]

"It just needs to be understood who runs those systems and who has run those systems for 50+ years."

White people, mostly.

The most overtly racist leaders were Southern Democrats, they switched to the Republic party eventually.

There are been lots of well meaning politicians that enforced or enacted very problematic laws. Kamala Harris is catching heat for her roll as the AG and DA, for example.

R and D don't really matter much in this conversation, IMHO.

Not white people, every single one of the cities these shootings seem to happen has diverse representatives. Chicago has had black mayor, police chief, city council, etc etc. Same with Minneapolis, DC, Boston, LA etc etc etc..


Myth Number One: In order to be competitive in the South, Republicans started to pander to white racists in the 1960s.
Fact: Republicans actually became competitive in the South as early as 1928, when Republican Herbert Hoover won over 47 percent of the South’s popular vote against Democrat Al Smith. In 1952, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower won the southern states of Tennessee, Florida and Virginia. And in 1956, he picked up Louisiana, Kentucky and West Virginia, too. And that was after he supported the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education that desegregated public schools; and after he sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock Central High School to enforce integration.
Myth Number Two: Southern Democrats, angry with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, switched parties.
Fact: Of the 21 Democratic senators who opposed the Civil Rights Act, just one became a Republican. The other 20 continued to be elected as Democrats, or were replaced by other Democrats. On average, those 20 seats didn’t go Republican for another two-and-a-half decades.
Myth Number Three: Since the implementation of the Southern Strategy, the Republicans have dominated the South.
Fact: Richard Nixon, the man who is often credited with creating the Southern Strategy, lost the Deep South in 1968. In contrast, Democrat Jimmy Carter nearly swept the region in 1976 - 12 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And in 1992, over 28 years later, Democrat Bill Clinton won Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia. The truth is, Republicans didn’t hold a majority of southern congressional seats until 1994, 30 years after the Civil Rights Act.

 

[LWC55]

I missed the word “systemic” in my quickly thumbed rhetorical question, so while my point was likely still clear to the good faith reader (as was yours frankly) you are literally correct. My rhetorical question still stands with this clarification.
As for your question, I am purposely not answering it because BigFin asked to keep party BS out of this thread.

That question has nothing to do with party or politics. I'll ask it again so we are clear. You seem to think there is only no racism or systemic racism. Can there not be anything between those two absolutes?

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Not white people, every single one of the cities these shootings seem to happen has diverse representatives. Chicago has had black mayor, police chief, city council, etc etc.. dame with Minneapolis, DC, Boston, LA etc etc etc..


Myth Number One: In order to be competitive in the South, Republicans started to pander to white racists in the 1960s.
Fact: Republicans actually became competitive in the South as early as 1928, when Republican Herbert Hoover won over 47 percent of the South’s popular vote against Democrat Al Smith. In 1952, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower won the southern states of Tennessee, Florida and Virginia. And in 1956, he picked up Louisiana, Kentucky and West Virginia, too. And that was after he supported the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education that desegregated public schools; and after he sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock Central High School to enforce integration.
Myth Number Two: Southern Democrats, angry with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, switched parties.
Fact: Of the 21 Democratic senators who opposed the Civil Rights Act, just one became a Republican. The other 20 continued to be elected as Democrats, or were replaced by other Democrats. On average, those 20 seats didn’t go Republican for another two-and-a-half decades.
Myth Number Three: Since the implementation of the Southern Strategy, the Republicans have dominated the South.
Fact: Richard Nixon, the man who is often credited with creating the Southern Strategy, lost the Deep South in 1968. In contrast, Democrat Jimmy Carter nearly swept the region in 1976 - 12 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And in 1992, over 28 years later, Democrat Bill Clinton won Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia. The truth is, Republicans didn’t hold a majority of southern congressional seats until 1994, 30 years after the Civil Rights Act.

I didn’t specify who or when, I just said there was eventually a shift.

Glad you focused on the important part of my statement though.

 

[LWC55]

"It just needs to be understood who runs those systems and who has run those systems for 50+ years."

White people, mostly.

The most overtly racist leaders were Southern Democrats, they switched to the Republic party eventually.

There are been lots of well meaning politicians that enforced or enacted very problematic laws. Kamala Harris is catching heat for her roll as the AG and DA, for example.

R and D don't really matter much in this conversation, IMHO.

White people, mostly are not racist. Are there some, for sure....same of all races. People from the South are also mostly not racist and had zero to do with setting up or controlling any racist systems in Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, NYC, etc... If you want to blame folks, blame the right folks.

As for Kamala Harris. If catching heat means being the front runner for Biden's VP nominee...then I guess she is catching heat.

 

[thusby]

We need sports back...

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Stanford scholars examine racism, social change and how to build a more just future | Stanford News

Stanford scholars have been looking for ways to reduce racial disparities and how to create meaningful change.

news.stanford.edu

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Racial profiling exists, no doubt. To the extent OBLM and their media propaganda promotes... Far from the facts present.
To pretend it doesn't exist at a joe blow construction yard, Black Entertainment Television or cleaning crew would be someone lacking...

Statistics do not lie. Based on the quantity of sworn officers, it's statistically far from systemic.

Then you better look at more data. The numbers don’t lie if you’re willing to look at them.

Why the disparity of numbers of cars searched for black people vs white?

 

[LWC55]

Then you better look at more data. The numbers don’t lie if you’re willing to look at them.

Why the disparity of numbers of cars searched for black people vs white?

I couldn't get your link to work. But is it possible the disparity has something do with the number of stops in high crime neighborhoods and the disparity of a higher percentage of crimes committed by different races? I would imagine that if you get pulled over in a high crime area, your chances of getting your car searched increase.....no matter your race.

 

[Sytes]

Then you better look at more data. The numbers don’t lie if you’re willing to look at them.

Why the disparity of numbers of cars searched for black people vs white?

Not sure where you go for your statistics. I don't see a link so I imagine it wasn't working or? This is where I go for my links. I'm not a fan of non-gov websites. Tends to get very subjective towards the desired results versus objective facts/statistics.
This is not meant with snarkiness. Simply sharing the source of information I find reasonably valuable. Taking into account the states that actually report incidents on the different metrics used, it holds various levels of information.

Crime/Law Enforcement Stats (UCR Program) | Federal Bureau of Investigation

The UCR Program's primary objective is to generate reliable information for use in law enforcement administration, operation, and management.

www.fbi.gov

 

[Deleted member 28227]

White people, mostly are not racist. Are there some, for sure....same of all races. People from the South are also mostly not racist and had zero to do with setting up or controlling any racist systems in Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, NYC, etc... If you want to blame folks, blame the right folks.

As for Kamala Harris. If catching heat means being the front runner for Biden's VP nominee...then I guess she is catching heat.

All people have biases. Those people make biased laws.

You aren't to find a smoking gun in this conversation, i.e. laws that say "Black people can't do xyz".
You will find laws like stop and frisk, which disproportionate target black people.

Let's unpack the racist thing a bit more.

Specific example, medicine. Lots of studies have shown that black patients have statistically significant worse outcomes than white patients at the same hospitals. Studies have also shown that black patients have better outcomes with black doctors. There is a ton of nuance to the topic, but here is a key facet. The medical professionals aren't explicitly racist, but because of implicit biases the communication between black patients and white doctors is worse than white patients and white doctors.

When the races of the patient and doctor are different they don't trust each other as much, communication therefore isn't as good and this leads directly to a worse outcome.
Communication isn't as good: patient may not fully disclose symptoms to doctor, and/or doctor may not listen or trust the patients report.

The two solutions that the best hospitals in the country are currently implementing. MGH, Mayo, UCSF, Hopkins
1. Staff diversity
2. Training doctors to recognize their own bias, and understand how that effects their patients outcomes

Systematic racism is way more complicated than simply having Jim Crow style laws on the books.

I would imagine that if you get pulled over in a high crime area, your chances of getting your car searched increase.....no matter your race.

This has not been my personal experience.

 

[okie archer]

Two separate incidence, but linked by a common problem. Reacting before knowing all the facts. Both racist in nature.

I'd link Brandon Tatums response to Jr., but this crowd would blow him off.

Brandon Tatum is awesome, as is Anthony Brian Logan, Candace Owens, Diamond & Silk, etc.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Not sure where you go for your statistics. I don't see a link so I imagine it wasn't working or? This is where I go for my links. I'm not a fan of non-gov websites. Tends to get very subjective towards the desired results versus objective facts/statistics.
This is not meant with snarkiness. Simply sharing the source of information I find reasonably valuable. Taking into account the states that actually report incidents on the different metrics used, it holds various levels of information.

Crime/Law Enforcement Stats (UCR Program) | Federal Bureau of Investigation

The UCR Program's primary objective is to generate reliable information for use in law enforcement administration, operation, and management.

www.fbi.gov

I get my statistics right from the agencies.

A ‘veil of darkness’ reduces racial bias in traffic stops | Stanford News

After analyzing 95 million traffic stop records, filed by officers with 21 state patrol agencies and 35 municipal police forces from 2011 to 2018, researchers concluded that “police stops and search decisions suffer from persistent racial bias.”

news.stanford.edu

The Stanford Open Policing Project

We are collecting, releasing, and analyzing data on millions of traffic stops across the United States.

openpolicing.stanford.edu

 

[okie archer]

Democrat or Republican it doesn't matter. Whether it's Lousiana or Maryland the system was designed to incarcerate minorities.

Systemic racism is not about individuals being racist, though many keep parroting that argument. Systemic racism is a system that was set up many generations ago by racists, that people today disregard as the norm. Read a book.

Which book can we read that isn't biased?

 

[VikingsGuy]

That question has nothing to do with party or politics. I'll ask it again so we are clear. You seem to think there is only no racism or systemic racism. Can there not be anything between those two absolutes?

I am referring to your initial question about "who is to blame" if there is racism.

I never said what you are suggesting so I am not going to play your game of "asking a question to a question". I have responded repeatedly about the nature of my question and yet you have never tried to respond to my question or my restatement the question. @JLS understood it the first time, maybe he can help you.

 

[FI460]

Which book can we read that isn't biased?

Post #20 would be a good start.

 

[Big Fin]

As much as some have tried to keep this thread on track and it made it far longer than I expected it would, there are those who just cannot have a discussion of any topic unless it can be boiled down to R v. D, left v. right. Time for those who want to make this a political conversation to take their opinions on this topic to Facebook. Facebook likes are easy to get that support one's political views and the assertion this is all a manufactured political issue.

In hopes we can keep the forum on track for hunting, conservation, public lands, and other relevant topics, I post the meme below in hopes folks understand the doses of sarcasm I mixed in my coffee this morning. Appreciate all who tried to keep this a worthwhile conversation, but we're now past that point.