Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 8:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/29/2018 6:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/29/2018 2:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 5/29/2018 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Boris, your premise is flawed........ you don't DECIDE to become a single Mom........... You decide to fornicate unwisely and end up alone and without a male partner. THAT occurs for a whole shitload of reasons..... from deadbeat maledom to crazy females who can't "nest",-------- among others..........

You have made my point. We need to address this first and foremost not race relations. Single parenthood is slowly killing this country.

you may be right, but I don't see how that can be fixed? Do e make it illegal to have sex if you are not married? Who has to enforce that law....and how would they know? You keep bringing up single parent households as being the major part of the problem. I'm not sure I agree with that. That's neither here nor there. I don't see any way to fix it. Sex education in schools doesn't do it. I think we both agree there's no way you're going to stop people from having sex, whether they are married or not. So, how do we do it? How about a suggestion for fixing it instead of just saying it needs to be fixed.

I'd spend $10bn on education starting in middle school. Maybe provide incentives to kids who graduate HS and don't have a kid by giving them $5k per year for college. Now it won't pay for a lot but it will pay for some state schooling community college. Again my kids are in middle school and NO ONE is talking to them about the dangers of single parenthood.

That is how I would attack it. Similar to the "Just Say No" campaign vs. drugs in the 80s. I'd do the same thing for single motherhood now. I would also make welfare programs a lot less attractive. Rather than giving welfare stamps, that they sell for other sh*t, I'd deliver actual food. This way they have to eat what I provide vs. what they want to eat. So they won't go hungry but they won't get to choose necessarily what they like.

This is what I would do wylie.

Do you have any proof that this program would work? 10bn isn't a ton of money, but it is enough on one program to need to have accountability and we need to know that it would work.

How would I have proof when this is a hypothetical? And you ask why I insult you? Geez.

Did they have proof that "Just say No" would work? I think it is worth a shot. Your solution is to cry racism aka white guilt.

Exactly. We don't know about a solution that works. It may be worth a shot but stop acting like it is an easy fix.

Racism isn't white guilt.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/30/2018 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/30/2018 12:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/30/2018 11:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 5/30/2018 11:19:00 AM (view original):
Could it possibly be that the difference in average earnings between the two races have to do with the number of people that have college degrees? Don't let logic get in the way, B_L. I've already proven to you that the wage gap narrows drastically when comparing blacks and whites with college degrees. Remember, black women with degrees actually make more than white women with degrees. Once again, I would hate for logic to get in the way for you.

Hmmm I wonder if racism could play a role in someone's access to college?

That depends on the school. Do you want me to list the racist institutions again? You see, some of the problem is that the same white people championing the idea of racism are the racists themselves.

I would argue that it is much more likely that the people saying that they don't see race are the racists over the people acknowledging that racism exists and that it is a problem.

You could argue that if you wish. If you want to believe that the elite in this country want things to change, go right ahead. IMHO, you are a fool (I mean that kindly.) You see, they are all for change...as long as it doesn't impact their own school, neighborhood or lifestyle. They want the rest of us to fight amongst ourselves while they sit comfortably above it all, like modern day Titans.

The 'elite' in the country? I don't see how that links. I mean, you are right, but my statement never said anything about that.

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 8:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 9:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 9:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/29/2018 6:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 5:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 3:29:00 PM (view original):
Why are we just discussing racism against blacks? What about the racism of blacks? No idea where to look for the numbers, but I'd bet the % of blacks who are racist is much higher than the % of whites. I'd also bet the % of racist whites has decreased much more over the last couple decades than the % of racist blacks. It's kind of hard for any race to say "Yeah, I'm cool with them.", when you have some of them screaming "I hate your black/white guts." in your face. Shouldn't addressing the racism of blacks be part of the discussion on how to make the problem better (it will never be eliminated)?

I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. Unless you can name an institutionally racist practice against white people this is a big fat nothingburger.

also, if you and your ancestors had been discriminated against for 250 years, wouldn't you be a little antagonistic against the people doing the discriminating?

Is it understandable? Yes.
Does that make it right or less detrimental? No.
You don't think white racism would decrease if nothing changed except black racism?

Not addressing the broken record named tang. institutional racism this, institutional racism that. He uses that "rationale" (excuse) so much he needs a key on his keyboard to type it all at once to avoid carpal tunnel.

Institutional racism isn't an excuse. No need for hyperbole here.

Tangplay here is where we differ.

Your definition of institutional racism:

100% due to the judicial system. You also believe because we were racists in the 40s it still impacts blacks now.

Mine is:

If KFC openly states we won't hire blacks. No institution does that.

Since you are dumb. I will give you this analogy. Say as a child I had a bad experience on a roller coaster and threw up after. I now won't allow my kids on roller coasters even though the one I threw up on has been long gone and my kids may have better constitution than me. To you that roller coaster is still causing my kids trauma because of what happened to me they are paying the price. To me its just me being an overprotective parent.

BTW - I love roller coasters and never threw up on one.

My point is the past is in the past and while it may influence future events it is not to be held against the current generation. Otherwise we should still be punishing Germany for the Nazis.

So our operational definition of institutional racism differs hence our debate goes nowhere and we end up going in circles.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

I agree with this statement. And I understand that you and I have differing definitions. That's why I wanted to clarify this long ago. So let me make my positions clear.

Here is an example, since I can't come up with an analogy.

Black person accused of a crime and convicted, despite being innocent, because the judge and police assumed (based on stereotypes) that black people commit most crimes and are troublemakers. While those people may not have been racist, we all have bias and we all stereotype. This happens a lot, and at a far greater rate than with white people. That is institutional racism.

Another example:
Black family tries to move into a good part of town in the 70's. They are denied because of redlining. That family moves into a bad part of town with tons of drugs (that may or may not have been promoted by the feds), bad schools, and lesser opportunities. That family is now at a disadvantage vs a family that was let into a better part of town. It is now MORE LIKELY that people in that family do drugs, don't graduate HS, have bad influences, etc. While these are all choices, it is still a disadvantage. That is institutional racism.

It is a little more cut and dry than a company just outright not hiring black people. More bias nowadays than outright racism. The roller coaster isn't a great analogy because the things being compared are not really equal.

It isn't 'punishing' anyone. What do you think happens if we as a society admit that institutional racism exists? We don't 'punish' white people. I don't have white guilt. We fix the problems by equalizing opportunity. We already agreed on 8/9 proposals I gave. If Jews still hadn't recovered from the Holocaust, we don't punish the Nazis further, we help the Jews. Seems simple enough.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

If you don't, just ask me questions instead of making accusations over things I didn't say.

I understand where you are coming from and 100% disagree with you.

If you want to believe that getting sent to jail doesn't put you at a disadvantage then go ahead.

wylie asked me what I would do and I gave my suggestion?

Roughly half of this welfare assistance, or $462 billion went to families with children, most of which are headed by single parents. --- I think $10bn, which is 2% of that figure is worth the investment.

No it isn't but you're trying to make me feel guilty for being white, you're not accusing me of racism. At least I don't think you are.

You agreed that kids with two parents regardless of race start ahead of those with one. Why do you refuse to push that agenda vs. crying institutional racism? Care to explain?

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 2:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 8:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 9:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 9:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/29/2018 6:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 5:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 3:29:00 PM (view original):
Why are we just discussing racism against blacks? What about the racism of blacks? No idea where to look for the numbers, but I'd bet the % of blacks who are racist is much higher than the % of whites. I'd also bet the % of racist whites has decreased much more over the last couple decades than the % of racist blacks. It's kind of hard for any race to say "Yeah, I'm cool with them.", when you have some of them screaming "I hate your black/white guts." in your face. Shouldn't addressing the racism of blacks be part of the discussion on how to make the problem better (it will never be eliminated)?

I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. Unless you can name an institutionally racist practice against white people this is a big fat nothingburger.

also, if you and your ancestors had been discriminated against for 250 years, wouldn't you be a little antagonistic against the people doing the discriminating?

Is it understandable? Yes.
Does that make it right or less detrimental? No.
You don't think white racism would decrease if nothing changed except black racism?

Not addressing the broken record named tang. institutional racism this, institutional racism that. He uses that "rationale" (excuse) so much he needs a key on his keyboard to type it all at once to avoid carpal tunnel.

Institutional racism isn't an excuse. No need for hyperbole here.

Tangplay here is where we differ.

Your definition of institutional racism:

100% due to the judicial system. You also believe because we were racists in the 40s it still impacts blacks now.

Mine is:

If KFC openly states we won't hire blacks. No institution does that.

Since you are dumb. I will give you this analogy. Say as a child I had a bad experience on a roller coaster and threw up after. I now won't allow my kids on roller coasters even though the one I threw up on has been long gone and my kids may have better constitution than me. To you that roller coaster is still causing my kids trauma because of what happened to me they are paying the price. To me its just me being an overprotective parent.

BTW - I love roller coasters and never threw up on one.

My point is the past is in the past and while it may influence future events it is not to be held against the current generation. Otherwise we should still be punishing Germany for the Nazis.

So our operational definition of institutional racism differs hence our debate goes nowhere and we end up going in circles.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

I agree with this statement. And I understand that you and I have differing definitions. That's why I wanted to clarify this long ago. So let me make my positions clear.

Here is an example, since I can't come up with an analogy.

Black person accused of a crime and convicted, despite being innocent, because the judge and police assumed (based on stereotypes) that black people commit most crimes and are troublemakers. While those people may not have been racist, we all have bias and we all stereotype. This happens a lot, and at a far greater rate than with white people. That is institutional racism.

Another example:
Black family tries to move into a good part of town in the 70's. They are denied because of redlining. That family moves into a bad part of town with tons of drugs (that may or may not have been promoted by the feds), bad schools, and lesser opportunities. That family is now at a disadvantage vs a family that was let into a better part of town. It is now MORE LIKELY that people in that family do drugs, don't graduate HS, have bad influences, etc. While these are all choices, it is still a disadvantage. That is institutional racism.

It is a little more cut and dry than a company just outright not hiring black people. More bias nowadays than outright racism. The roller coaster isn't a great analogy because the things being compared are not really equal.

It isn't 'punishing' anyone. What do you think happens if we as a society admit that institutional racism exists? We don't 'punish' white people. I don't have white guilt. We fix the problems by equalizing opportunity. We already agreed on 8/9 proposals I gave. If Jews still hadn't recovered from the Holocaust, we don't punish the Nazis further, we help the Jews. Seems simple enough.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

If you don't, just ask me questions instead of making accusations over things I didn't say.

I understand where you are coming from and 100% disagree with you.

If you want to believe that getting sent to jail doesn't put you at a disadvantage then go ahead.

Its based on wealth not color. See Leonard Little.

I'll post this again.

From John H. McWhorter:

Yet during the decade I came to realize that this feeling made me odd man out among most black Americans. In every race-related debate—whether over Rodney King, O. J. Simpson, the Million Man March, Ebonics, or affirmative action—almost every black person I knew, many with backgrounds as comfortable as my own, started from the fierce conviction that, decades after the Civil Rights Act, whitey’s foot remains pressed upon all black Americans’ necks. For most black Americans, the rapid increase of the black middle class, of interracial relationships and marriages, and of blacks in prestigious positions has no bearing on the real state of black America. Further, they believe, whites’ inability to grasp the unmistakable reality of oppression is itself proof of racism, while blacks who question that reality are self-deluded.







https://www.city-journal.org/html/what%E2%80%99s-holding-blacks-back-12025.html

Here is some more:

Blacks aren’t the only people who’ve sabotaged themselves through victimology. Take the eerily similar case of the Boston Irish, the target of contempt and discrimination in nineteenth-century America. By the 1920s, when anti-Irish bigotry had receded greatly, historical memory allowed Mayor James Michael Curley to maintain power by stoking Irish resentment very like today’s black resentment. Curley found “anti-Irish” sentiment everywhere: merit hiring systems were “anti-Irish”; “Anglo-Saxon” culture was fatally diseased. Even today, the remnant of this mentality still traps members of South Boston’s Irish community in crummy housing projects full of idle adults who have high rates of substance abuse and even speak a local dialect it takes a little while to wrap one’s ears around. In South Boston, as in South Central, a fatalistic skepticism that you can rise above your community and a deeply embedded wariness of mainstream culture thwart ambition even where opportunity is available.

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:03:00 PM (view original):
From John H. McWhorter:

Yet during the decade I came to realize that this feeling made me odd man out among most black Americans. In every race-related debate—whether over Rodney King, O. J. Simpson, the Million Man March, Ebonics, or affirmative action—almost every black person I knew, many with backgrounds as comfortable as my own, started from the fierce conviction that, decades after the Civil Rights Act, whitey’s foot remains pressed upon all black Americans’ necks. For most black Americans, the rapid increase of the black middle class, of interracial relationships and marriages, and of blacks in prestigious positions has no bearing on the real state of black America. Further, they believe, whites’ inability to grasp the unmistakable reality of oppression is itself proof of racism, while blacks who question that reality are self-deluded.

He is black...so I'll take his word over yours, Captain 99% tax.


https://www.city-journal.org/html/what%E2%80%99s-holding-blacks-back-12025.html

But you'll ignore the words of "almost every black person [he knows]."

Posted by wylie715 on 5/30/2018 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/30/2018 8:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/29/2018 7:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DoctorKz on 5/29/2018 7:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/29/2018 7:06:00 PM (view original):
Nobody asked you to write a check. Its easy for you (or me, for that matter) to say get over it, since we didn't go through it. As a Jew should I get over what happen in WWII? It was over 70 years ago.

You are right. It is easy for me to say that. I hadn't considered that. And if people encountered more people like myself regarding race, they would know we are rooting for them. That there is hope. I have good friends that get profiled. A lot. It ****** me off.

True. There are many people out there who don't see color, or gender, religion or sexual preference when looking at a person, just the person. It sounds like you are one of them. I like to think I'm one too. The problem is, while it is getting better, there are still far too many people who only see race, or gender, religion or sexual preference and judge people based on that.

When I argued this to a certain someone on this site a while back, he said everyone sees color and called me a liar for claiming I didn't.
Looks like it has a different effect on him coming from his own side of thinking.

Absolutely love the idea of a No Single Mothering campaign.

I hope you're not referring to me. I don't think I've ever called you a liar, or anyone else on this site either.

It's all in black and white and I'm sure the person who said it remembers they said it.

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:06:00 PM (view original):
wylie asked me what I would do and I gave my suggestion?

Roughly half of this welfare assistance, or $462 billion went to families with children, most of which are headed by single parents. --- I think $10bn, which is 2% of that figure is worth the investment.

No it isn't but you're trying to make me feel guilty for being white, you're not accusing me of racism. At least I don't think you are.

You agreed that kids with two parents regardless of race start ahead of those with one. Why do you refuse to push that agenda vs. crying institutional racism? Care to explain?

It's a fine suggestion.

I am not trying to make you feel white guilt nor do I think you are racist.

Because both things are important. They are both factors. We all agree on the two-parent thing.

Posted by bad_luck on 5/30/2018 2:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:03:00 PM (view original):
From John H. McWhorter:

Yet during the decade I came to realize that this feeling made me odd man out among most black Americans. In every race-related debate—whether over Rodney King, O. J. Simpson, the Million Man March, Ebonics, or affirmative action—almost every black person I knew, many with backgrounds as comfortable as my own, started from the fierce conviction that, decades after the Civil Rights Act, whitey’s foot remains pressed upon all black Americans’ necks. For most black Americans, the rapid increase of the black middle class, of interracial relationships and marriages, and of blacks in prestigious positions has no bearing on the real state of black America. Further, they believe, whites’ inability to grasp the unmistakable reality of oppression is itself proof of racism, while blacks who question that reality are self-deluded.

He is black...so I'll take his word over yours, Captain 99% tax.


https://www.city-journal.org/html/what%E2%80%99s-holding-blacks-back-12025.html

But you'll ignore the words of "almost every black person [he knows]."

Based on his logic, I won't ignore it but I will certainly give him more of a thought than I give you, Captain 99% tax.

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 2:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 8:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 9:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 9:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/29/2018 6:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 5:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 3:29:00 PM (view original):
Why are we just discussing racism against blacks? What about the racism of blacks? No idea where to look for the numbers, but I'd bet the % of blacks who are racist is much higher than the % of whites. I'd also bet the % of racist whites has decreased much more over the last couple decades than the % of racist blacks. It's kind of hard for any race to say "Yeah, I'm cool with them.", when you have some of them screaming "I hate your black/white guts." in your face. Shouldn't addressing the racism of blacks be part of the discussion on how to make the problem better (it will never be eliminated)?

I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. Unless you can name an institutionally racist practice against white people this is a big fat nothingburger.

also, if you and your ancestors had been discriminated against for 250 years, wouldn't you be a little antagonistic against the people doing the discriminating?

Is it understandable? Yes.
Does that make it right or less detrimental? No.
You don't think white racism would decrease if nothing changed except black racism?

Not addressing the broken record named tang. institutional racism this, institutional racism that. He uses that "rationale" (excuse) so much he needs a key on his keyboard to type it all at once to avoid carpal tunnel.

Institutional racism isn't an excuse. No need for hyperbole here.

Tangplay here is where we differ.

Your definition of institutional racism:

100% due to the judicial system. You also believe because we were racists in the 40s it still impacts blacks now.

Mine is:

If KFC openly states we won't hire blacks. No institution does that.

Since you are dumb. I will give you this analogy. Say as a child I had a bad experience on a roller coaster and threw up after. I now won't allow my kids on roller coasters even though the one I threw up on has been long gone and my kids may have better constitution than me. To you that roller coaster is still causing my kids trauma because of what happened to me they are paying the price. To me its just me being an overprotective parent.

BTW - I love roller coasters and never threw up on one.

My point is the past is in the past and while it may influence future events it is not to be held against the current generation. Otherwise we should still be punishing Germany for the Nazis.

So our operational definition of institutional racism differs hence our debate goes nowhere and we end up going in circles.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

I agree with this statement. And I understand that you and I have differing definitions. That's why I wanted to clarify this long ago. So let me make my positions clear.

Here is an example, since I can't come up with an analogy.

Black person accused of a crime and convicted, despite being innocent, because the judge and police assumed (based on stereotypes) that black people commit most crimes and are troublemakers. While those people may not have been racist, we all have bias and we all stereotype. This happens a lot, and at a far greater rate than with white people. That is institutional racism.

Another example:
Black family tries to move into a good part of town in the 70's. They are denied because of redlining. That family moves into a bad part of town with tons of drugs (that may or may not have been promoted by the feds), bad schools, and lesser opportunities. That family is now at a disadvantage vs a family that was let into a better part of town. It is now MORE LIKELY that people in that family do drugs, don't graduate HS, have bad influences, etc. While these are all choices, it is still a disadvantage. That is institutional racism.

It is a little more cut and dry than a company just outright not hiring black people. More bias nowadays than outright racism. The roller coaster isn't a great analogy because the things being compared are not really equal.

It isn't 'punishing' anyone. What do you think happens if we as a society admit that institutional racism exists? We don't 'punish' white people. I don't have white guilt. We fix the problems by equalizing opportunity. We already agreed on 8/9 proposals I gave. If Jews still hadn't recovered from the Holocaust, we don't punish the Nazis further, we help the Jews. Seems simple enough.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

If you don't, just ask me questions instead of making accusations over things I didn't say.

I understand where you are coming from and 100% disagree with you.

If you want to believe that getting sent to jail doesn't put you at a disadvantage then go ahead.

Its based on wealth not color. See Leonard Little.

INNOCENT BLACK PEOPLE ARE CONVICTED FAR MORE THAN INNOCENT WHITE PEOPLE.

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 2:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:06:00 PM (view original):
wylie asked me what I would do and I gave my suggestion?

Roughly half of this welfare assistance, or $462 billion went to families with children, most of which are headed by single parents. --- I think $10bn, which is 2% of that figure is worth the investment.

No it isn't but you're trying to make me feel guilty for being white, you're not accusing me of racism. At least I don't think you are.

You agreed that kids with two parents regardless of race start ahead of those with one. Why do you refuse to push that agenda vs. crying institutional racism? Care to explain?

It's a fine suggestion.

I am not trying to make you feel white guilt nor do I think you are racist.

Because both things are important. They are both factors. We all agree on the two-parent thing.

So if WE ALL agree on the two parent thing and disagree on the institutional racism, does not not make more sense for us to attack the two parent thing first and foremost? Almost a bi partisan thought process?

Before I brought this to your attention, did you know how major of a factor having two parents was? I am just curious.

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 2:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 2:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/30/2018 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 8:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 9:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 9:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 5/29/2018 6:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/29/2018 5:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 5/29/2018 3:29:00 PM (view original):
Why are we just discussing racism against blacks? What about the racism of blacks? No idea where to look for the numbers, but I'd bet the % of blacks who are racist is much higher than the % of whites. I'd also bet the % of racist whites has decreased much more over the last couple decades than the % of racist blacks. It's kind of hard for any race to say "Yeah, I'm cool with them.", when you have some of them screaming "I hate your black/white guts." in your face. Shouldn't addressing the racism of blacks be part of the discussion on how to make the problem better (it will never be eliminated)?

I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. Unless you can name an institutionally racist practice against white people this is a big fat nothingburger.

also, if you and your ancestors had been discriminated against for 250 years, wouldn't you be a little antagonistic against the people doing the discriminating?

Is it understandable? Yes.
Does that make it right or less detrimental? No.
You don't think white racism would decrease if nothing changed except black racism?

Not addressing the broken record named tang. institutional racism this, institutional racism that. He uses that "rationale" (excuse) so much he needs a key on his keyboard to type it all at once to avoid carpal tunnel.

Institutional racism isn't an excuse. No need for hyperbole here.

Tangplay here is where we differ.

Your definition of institutional racism:

100% due to the judicial system. You also believe because we were racists in the 40s it still impacts blacks now.

Mine is:

If KFC openly states we won't hire blacks. No institution does that.

Since you are dumb. I will give you this analogy. Say as a child I had a bad experience on a roller coaster and threw up after. I now won't allow my kids on roller coasters even though the one I threw up on has been long gone and my kids may have better constitution than me. To you that roller coaster is still causing my kids trauma because of what happened to me they are paying the price. To me its just me being an overprotective parent.

BTW - I love roller coasters and never threw up on one.

My point is the past is in the past and while it may influence future events it is not to be held against the current generation. Otherwise we should still be punishing Germany for the Nazis.

So our operational definition of institutional racism differs hence our debate goes nowhere and we end up going in circles.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

I agree with this statement. And I understand that you and I have differing definitions. That's why I wanted to clarify this long ago. So let me make my positions clear.

Here is an example, since I can't come up with an analogy.

Black person accused of a crime and convicted, despite being innocent, because the judge and police assumed (based on stereotypes) that black people commit most crimes and are troublemakers. While those people may not have been racist, we all have bias and we all stereotype. This happens a lot, and at a far greater rate than with white people. That is institutional racism.

Another example:
Black family tries to move into a good part of town in the 70's. They are denied because of redlining. That family moves into a bad part of town with tons of drugs (that may or may not have been promoted by the feds), bad schools, and lesser opportunities. That family is now at a disadvantage vs a family that was let into a better part of town. It is now MORE LIKELY that people in that family do drugs, don't graduate HS, have bad influences, etc. While these are all choices, it is still a disadvantage. That is institutional racism.

It is a little more cut and dry than a company just outright not hiring black people. More bias nowadays than outright racism. The roller coaster isn't a great analogy because the things being compared are not really equal.

It isn't 'punishing' anyone. What do you think happens if we as a society admit that institutional racism exists? We don't 'punish' white people. I don't have white guilt. We fix the problems by equalizing opportunity. We already agreed on 8/9 proposals I gave. If Jews still hadn't recovered from the Holocaust, we don't punish the Nazis further, we help the Jews. Seems simple enough.

Do you understand this? Y or N?

If you don't, just ask me questions instead of making accusations over things I didn't say.

I understand where you are coming from and 100% disagree with you.

If you want to believe that getting sent to jail doesn't put you at a disadvantage then go ahead.

Its based on wealth not color. See Leonard Little.

INNOCENT BLACK PEOPLE ARE CONVICTED FAR MORE THAN INNOCENT WHITE PEOPLE.

INNOCENT POOR PEOPLE you mean?

Also logically it makes sense. If the real criminal is black, anybody who is mistakenly convicted for that crime will almost inevitably be black as well. We also agree that the justice system is flawed for all people who don't have $$ for a good attorney. That needs to be fixed.

Our justice system is geared toward the rich and that is annoying.

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/30/2018 2:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 5/30/2018 2:03:00 PM (view original):
From John H. McWhorter:

Yet during the decade I came to realize that this feeling made me odd man out among most black Americans. In every race-related debate—whether over Rodney King, O. J. Simpson, the Million Man March, Ebonics, or affirmative action—almost every black person I knew, many with backgrounds as comfortable as my own, started from the fierce conviction that, decades after the Civil Rights Act, whitey’s foot remains pressed upon all black Americans’ necks. For most black Americans, the rapid increase of the black middle class, of interracial relationships and marriages, and of blacks in prestigious positions has no bearing on the real state of black America. Further, they believe, whites’ inability to grasp the unmistakable reality of oppression is itself proof of racism, while blacks who question that reality are self-deluded.

He is black...so I'll take his word over yours, Captain 99% tax.


https://www.city-journal.org/html/what%E2%80%99s-holding-blacks-back-12025.html

But you'll ignore the words of "almost every black person [he knows]."

Based on his logic, I won't ignore it but I will certainly give him more of a thought than I give you, Captain 99% tax.

LOL, dude there is literally nothing anyone could show you that would convince you that racism still puts black people at a disadvantage. You don't want to hear it, no matter what.

Look a housing discrimination study done in 2012. Nope, if they just make sure they get married before they have kids, landlords will rent to them.

Look, prison sentencing discrimination against blacks. Nope, if their moms had gotten married before they had them, the judge would have sentenced them to less time.

Look, a study revealing continued employment discrimination against blacks. Nope, in 130 cities, blacks are able to eat, so that's a lie. And also, they should get married.

Look, a state official refuses to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple in 2009 (!). Nope, if they would just get married...wait...