Race and Racism in The United States

[The Cobalt Sky]

I don't think the NBA is more important than our prison systems. Think that through again. Sports are sports, and there's more than just basketball, but our prison and criminal justice systems are something far beyond that.

Still, but there are quotas in firms, education system and all aspects of live. I hope you are consistal enough to condem the overpresenatation of blacks in sports. If you do not do it people might think you are racist.

I think Equestria said it best on that part. Also, if by "people", you're referring to yourself, then I don't care. Lastly, get your priorities straight. Prison and criminal justice systems are more important than just basketball.

Basketball is the sport of choice for inner city blacks because it's considerably cheaper to play and learn than say, baseball. Hence why there are startlingly more African Americans in the NBA than there are in MLB. It really does just come down to the fact that very large portions of the African American community are walled off from other sports due to economic factors. Economic factors whose roots were sewn with racism.

[Mavorpen]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/us/07baltimore.html?pagewanted=all
http://uar.sagepub.com/content/36/4/452.short
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1 ... 98.9521322
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2 ... id=4&uid=2

I assume based off your sources you have some sort of college-provided premium access, as I do.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src ... opp/FHLaws
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4 ... 256&uid=62

Then why do appear to not have read either of these sources, considering the fact that neither of them cite any research confirming your claim that housing discrimination no longer exists? The first one is just a list of laws and regulations that forbid de jure housing discrimination and the second one just says that the laws are a lot more effective than they were when first implemented. Nothing in it stating that it doesn't occur, which is what we're ACTUALLY debating.

I'll repeat one of my earlier responses: stop fucking lying. You don't HAVE any evidence. Not a single shred of evidence. And you know that. So you're sticking to this stupid caricature of my argument to avoid the burden of proof you have. I'll ask this up front: give me evidence that the disparity in arrests and convictions don't have to do with racism and is because they commit more of the crimes that profiling seeks to prevent. I've given you possible sources of avenue for you to look for. You have NO excuse to continue your pathetic dodging of the burden of proof.

I would appreciate it if you would consider ceasing your swearing.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -about-bl/

Today blacks are about 13 percent of the population and continue to be responsible for an inordinate amount of crime. Between 1976 and 2005 blacks com­mitted more than half of all murders in the United States.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st ... ericans-1/

In 2011, black males 15-34 were 10 times more likely to die of murder than whites of the same age group.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/cr ... -and-media

These and the rest of the eight million stories in the naked city inspired Maryland legislator Pat McDonough to ask that Baltimore be declared a “No-Travel-Zone.” After all, wrote Flaherty, “Police will not arrest black criminals. Juries will not convict them,” and a correspondent told him, “Anyone who isn’t black is a target.” But Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake doesn’t want to return to the days of “mass arrests.” She loves being able to say that crime is “down.”

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=14864

In 2010 black youths committed six times more murders, three times more rapes, 10 times more robberies and three times more assaults than did their white counterparts.

I'll repeat one of my earlier responses: stop fucking lying. You don't HAVE any evidence. Not a single shred of evidence. And you know that. So you're sticking to this stupid caricature of my argument to avoid the burden of proof you have. I'll ask this up front: give me evidence that the disparity in arrests and convictions don't have to do with racism and is because they commit more of the crimes that profiling seeks to prevent. I've given you possible sources of avenue for you to look for. You have NO excuse to continue your pathetic dodging of the burden of proof.

I'll ask this up front: give me evidence that the disparity in arrests and convictions don't have to do with racism and is because they commit more of the crimes that profiling seeks to prevent.

because they commit more of the crimes that profiling seeks to prevent.

Care to try again, but this time, post sources that actually have to do with the debate?

[The Cobalt Sky]

I'd like you to prove that to me. Did you even read my OP?

No he is right. If your white and make a comment that is slightly negative about another person and they aren't white then wait for the race card to be played...

Anecdotal evidence that probably is based completely in opinion. I sure love that. Also, I think you just played the "you're playing the race card" card. In other words, you just used a go-to term in order to devalue ANY claims of racism, even ones that are legitimate. Am I "playing the race card" when I tell someone to stop using the n word in an inappropriate way? Yes. But are they a racist? Most likely yes.

I'm not even going to go into the details, but the majority of white people will agree with me on this one...

And this is based on an official study? Please, sir, direct me to it.

Also, How about you read the OP again, and tell me that racism isn't widespread. I think you skipped the part about racial profiling.

[Devvo Mate]

No he is right. If your white and make a comment that is slightly negative about another person and they aren't white then wait for the race card to be played...

That doesn't happen you fucking mentalist

[Saiwania]

Your point was that white flight was expedited by the decline of Detroit's auto-industry, which I've shown you to be false. Now your claim is that blacks don't have the right to live next to whites, which doesn't stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.

Just wanted to note that you haven't actually proven that Detroit's auto industry collapse had no part in getting Whites to leave, the Washington Post link you used is just an editorial.

[Eastern Equestria]

Your point was that white flight was expedited by the decline of Detroit's auto-industry, which I've shown you to be false. Now your claim is that blacks don't have the right to live next to whites, which doesn't stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.

Just wanted to note that you haven't actually proven that Detroit's auto industry collapse had no part in getting Whites to leave, the Washington Post link you used is just an editorial.

During the 1950s, the city lost 363,000 white residents while it gained 182,000 black residents. In 1950, the population was 16 percent black, and by the time of the 1967 riot it had grown to a third.

Based off of the simple and irrefutable fact that white flight from Detroit predated the collapse of it's automobile industry and came to a head during the city's most heated period of racial divide, we can logically conclude that the latter did not trigger the former.

[Salus Maior]

I work at a school with kids, and there's a bunch of kids with different ethnic backgrounds and they all get along (well, generally ) and they appreciate each other's differences. I think America's doing pretty good.

[Patridam]

Then why do appear to not have read either of these sources, considering the fact that neither of them cite any research confirming your claim that housing discrimination no longer exists? The first one is just a list of laws and regulations that forbid de jure housing discrimination and the second one just says that the laws are a lot more effective than they were when first implemented. Nothing in it stating that it doesn't occur, which is what we're ACTUALLY debating.

I have proven that discrimination in the housing market is wholly illegal. The examples you've posted do nothing other than show that in isolated incidents, certain lenders target black neighborhoods over white neighborhoods - but that doesn't mean that the system is home to to widespread racism. In fact, ageism is much more of a problem in the world of lending.

Care to try again, but this time, post sources that actually have to do with the debate?

What sort of crimes does profiling seek to prevent; if not violent ones? It certainly won't be preventing insurance fraud.

Based off of the simple and irrefutable fact that white flight from Detroit predated the collapse of it's automobile industry and came to a head during the city's most heated period of racial divide, we can logically conclude that the latter did not trigger the former.

I do have to agree, Detroit's auto industry didn't start declining until the early 70s and didn't collapse until the 80s. It possibly expedited the latter years of suburbanization of whites, and exacerbated the poverty of inner city residents, but it cannot be cited as a primary cause of 'white flight'

[Mavorpen]

I have proven that discrimination in the housing market is wholly illegal.

Congratulations on proving something that wasn't in question?

The examples you've posted do nothing other than show that in isolated incidents, certain lenders target black neighborhoods over white neighborhoods - but that doesn't mean that the system is home to to widespread racism. In fact, ageism is much more of a problem in the world of lending.

Wrong. I didn't post "examples," I posted peer reviewed research indicating a widespread and serious issue. You have made no attempt to demonstrate otherwise with any peer reviewed research of your own. You don't get to declare something as being isolated with no backing.

What sort of crimes does profiling seek to prevent; if not violent ones? It certainly won't be preventing insurance fraud.

Don't straw man AGAIN. In the long run, yes, profiling has the purpose of reducing violent crime in the long run. That's NOT the debate. The debate is over crimes that profiling seeks to DIRECTLY curb, such as drug and weapons trafficking, which is why those represent the vast majority of arrests for profiling. Cops don't profile you and pull you over in the hopes to catch you for raping and beating someone. They do it for specific reasons that you failed to cite any information on.

[Saiwania]

Based off of the simple and irrefutable fact that white flight from Detroit predated the collapse of it's automobile industry and came to a head during the city's most heated period of racial divide, we can logically conclude that the latter did not trigger the former.

Regardless of what caused the White residents of Detroit to move, I think it can be acknowledged that staying in Detroit would've been nothing but a bad decision for them. There was no future to be had there and they could get lower property taxes, more land, and better schools by moving to a suburb outside of the city early on. My grandparents would've done so, my parents would have, and I will unashamedly leave a place as well, if it is no longer to my liking. People are not going to stay just to not be racist when the benefits to be had strongly favor emigrating.

[The Serbian Empire]

Racism is always a problem with a country. I come from Australia and I can say the flavour of the month is to hate Muslims. From what I can gather about America, you (plural) haven't moved passed hating "blacks".

In the 40's and 50's Australia was racist to Non-English Europeans. Italians and Greeks immigrating to Aus. They were often abused/discriminated and called wogs. Now in 2015 they are considered Australian

In the 60's and 70's Australia was racist to the Vietnamese "boat people". Refugees fleeing from the Viet Cong. About 40-50 years later time Australia considers Vietnamese people Australian.

Now the flavor of the month is to hate Muslims.

Probably because of race riots which almost always are blacks burning stuff. You don't see Hispanics do it and you don't see Asians setting the US ablaze during race riots. The last Hispanic riot was the Zoot Suit Riot during WWII in LA. How many black race riots have occurred just in LA after that? Two. When you have race riots televised, the racists just keep being fed the image of blacks as "looting, shooting arsonists" even when most of them are law abiding citizens.

[Eastern Equestria]

Based off of the simple and irrefutable fact that white flight from Detroit predated the collapse of it's automobile industry and came to a head during the city's most heated period of racial divide, we can logically conclude that the latter did not trigger the former.

Regardless of what caused the White residents of Detroit to move, I think it can be acknowledged that staying in Detroit would've been nothing but a bad decision for them. There was no future to be had there and they could get lower property taxes, more land, and better schools by moving to a suburb outside of the city early on. My grandparents would've done so, my parents would have, and I will unashamedly leave a place as well, if it is no longer to my liking. People are not going to stay just to not be racist when the benefits to be had strongly favor emigrating.

The problem with these meaningless truisms that you've resorted to spouting in lieu of actual arguments, is that it's already been demonstrated to you that Detroit's white population did in fact migrate en masse for racial purposes. The auto-industry, property taxes, and public education played virtually no factor in the minds of the hundreds of thousands of whites that bolted from the city following both desegregation and steady increases in the black population. It had everything to do with racial bigotry.

If all you have to say at this point is "people are allowed to move wherever they want", then not only are you glossing over the issue but you're contributing nothing to the discussion.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Regardless of what caused the White residents of Detroit to move, I think it can be acknowledged that staying in Detroit would've been nothing but a bad decision for them. There was no future to be had there and they could get lower property taxes, more land, and better schools by moving to a suburb outside of the city early on. My grandparents would've done so, my parents would have, and I will unashamedly leave a place as well, if it is no longer to my liking. People are not going to stay just to not be racist when the benefits to be had strongly favor emigrating.

The problem with these meaningless truisms that you've resorted to spouting in lieu of actual arguments, is that it's already been demonstrated to you that Detroit's white population did in fact migrate en masse for racial purposes. The auto-industry, property taxes, and public education played virtually no factor in the minds of the hundreds of thousands of whites that bolted from the city following both desegregation and steady increases in the black population. It had everything to do with racial bigotry.

If all you have to say at this point is "people are allowed to move wherever they want", then not only are you glossing over the issue but you're contributing nothing to the discussion.

Yes, but his record shows that if you don't give him that, he has nothing to post whatsoever.

[Eastern Equestria]

The problem with these meaningless truisms that you've resorted to spouting in lieu of actual arguments, is that it's already been demonstrated to you that Detroit's white population did in fact migrate en masse for racial purposes. The auto-industry, property taxes, and public education played virtually no factor in the minds of the hundreds of thousands of whites that bolted from the city following both desegregation and steady increases in the black population. It had everything to do with racial bigotry.

If all you have to say at this point is "people are allowed to move wherever they want", then not only are you glossing over the issue but you're contributing nothing to the discussion.

Yes, but his record shows that if you don't give him that, he has nothing to post whatsoever.

Blessed are we, then, for being witness to his impressive trail of banality.

[Saiwania]

The problem with these meaningless truisms that you've resorted to spouting in lieu of actual arguments, is that it's already been demonstrated to you that Detroit's white population did in fact migrate en masse for racial purposes.

Whites began to leave Detroit in 1950, I'm sure that was more than a full decade before civil rights era legislation was on the books. Can you honestly say that you would have stayed in Detroit if you were able to leave at the time? If not, how long would you be willing to stay for? Why is it that Detroit had a consistent decline while places like Cleveland were able to survive just fine and experience a revival if only racism is to blame? Every major American city has or had racial divisions and that has never destroyed them. So I'm not inclined to believe that Detroit collapsed only because Whites chose to leave.

If Detroit relied on White landowners staying to continue being a prosperous city and had no alternative plans for adapting to a different situation, then the city had no redeeming value to begin with to attract people for gentrification.

[Eastern Equestria]

The problem with these meaningless truisms that you've resorted to spouting in lieu of actual arguments, is that it's already been demonstrated to you that Detroit's white population did in fact migrate en masse for racial purposes.

Whites began to leave Detroit in 1950, I'm sure that was a full decade before the civil rights movement and desegregation.

Are you really that unable to distinguish the different factors I've mentioned? I said that white flight occurred both after desegregation (which expedited it more so than it precipitated it) and the influx of black migrants to Detroit, which began in the 40's and grew in the ensuing decades. Of course you'd know that if you had actually cared to read the sources I've provided you. Then again, perhaps I'm asking too much of you.

Can you honestly say that you would have stayed in Detroit if you were able to leave at the time?

I wouldn't have left for the same reasons as those white Detroiters, that's for damn sure.

Why is it that Detroit had a consistent decline while places like Cleveland were able to survive just fine and experience a revival if only racism is to blame? Every major American city has or had racial divisions and that has never destroyed them. So I'm not inclined to believe that Detroit collapsed only because Whites chose to leave.
If Detroit relied on White landowners staying to continue being a prosperous city and had no alternative plans for adapting to a different situation, then the city had no redeeming value to begin with to attract people for gentrification.

"Stop beating me!"

[Patridam]

The problem with these meaningless truisms that you've resorted to spouting in lieu of actual arguments, is that it's already been demonstrated to you that Detroit's white population did in fact migrate en masse for racial purposes. The auto-industry, property taxes, and public education played virtually no factor in the minds of the hundreds of thousands of whites that bolted from the city following both desegregation and steady increases in the black population. It had everything to do with racial bigotry.

If all you have to say at this point is "people are allowed to move wherever they want", then not only are you glossing over the issue but you're contributing nothing to the discussion.

Hold it right there. As someone with a heavy interest in the post-war and populuxe eras, the migration of whites out of urban areas and into the suburbs was not because the whites wanted to avoid minorities.

Simply put, after WWII most American cities were overpopulated and filled to the brim. FHA legislation and the GI Bill made it possible for millions of people who could've never gotten a mortgage (prewar mortgages were usually only for a small amounts with a great deal of money down) or owned property to buy a house in new suburban developments. The white populations migrated en masse to avoid the crowding of the cities, attain the traditional american dream of home ownership, and live in a place considered (then, at least) to be better overall, especially in terms of safety and educational opportunities.

It wasn't to 'get away' from other races. Had FHA policies of the time not treated black residents in a community as property value detriments blacks would have also taken the opportunity to move to the suburbs as well. There were a smattering of black-only suburbs, but difficulty in obtaining mortgages kept them limited in scale. In any case, I don't think it's fair to accuse everyone who left for the suburbs in the 1940s/50s/60s of doing so to avoid minorities.

Probably because of race riots which almost always are blacks burning stuff. You don't see Hispanics do it and you don't see Asians setting the US ablaze during race riots. The last Hispanic riot was the Zoot Suit Riot during WWII in LA. How many black race riots have occurred just in LA after that? Two. When you have race riots televised, the racists just keep being fed the image of blacks as "looting, shooting arsonists" even when most of them are law abiding citizens.

That raises a good point. While some of the things blacks riot about (for some involved, as in any riot, it's just an excuse to loot and destroy) have salient points, burning down neighborhoods and attacking police only serves to exacerbate the problem and further separate races. Looking at Asians in America as an example; they have certainly experienced racism from time to time but they haven't rioted. Now they have an average household income equal to that of non-Hispanic Caucasians, and anti-Asian racism isn't accepted even among the sort of behind-closed-doors racists spoken about before in this thread.

[Eastern Equestria]

The problem with these meaningless truisms that you've resorted to spouting in lieu of actual arguments, is that it's already been demonstrated to you that Detroit's white population did in fact migrate en masse for racial purposes. The auto-industry, property taxes, and public education played virtually no factor in the minds of the hundreds of thousands of whites that bolted from the city following both desegregation and steady increases in the black population. It had everything to do with racial bigotry.

If all you have to say at this point is "people are allowed to move wherever they want", then not only are you glossing over the issue but you're contributing nothing to the discussion.

~snip~

Now instead of trying to lure me into arguments that have nothing to do with the post you responded to, why don't you try to address the fact that white flight from Detroit was demonstrably prompted by racial unrest?

The white exodus from Detroit had been prodigiously steady prior to the riot, totaling twenty-two thousand in 1966, but afterwards it was frantic. In 1967 (the year in which Detroit's race riots occurred), with less than half the year remaining after the summer explosion—the outward population migration reached sixty-seven thousand. In 1968 the figure hit eighty-thousand, followed by forty-six thousand in 1969.[73]

The only way you could misconstrue the phenomenon as not being racially motivated is by sticking your head in the sand.

[Mavorpen]

~snip~

Now instead of trying to lure me into arguments that have nothing to do with the post you responded to, why don't you try to address the fact that white flight from Detroit was demonstrably prompted by racial unrest?

The white exodus from Detroit had been prodigiously steady prior to the riot, totaling twenty-two thousand in 1966, but afterwards it was frantic. In 1967 (the year in which Detroit's race riots occurred), with less than half the year remaining after the summer explosion—the outward population migration reached sixty-seven thousand. In 1968 the figure hit eighty-thousand, followed by forty-six thousand in 1969.[73]

The only way you could misconstrue the phenomenon as not being racially motivated is by sticking your head in the sand.

This shouldn't come as a surprise if you read my "debate" with him in this thread. Ignoring arguments and attacking straw men is what he does.

[The Cobalt Sky]

That raises a good point. While some of the things blacks riot about (for some involved, as in any riot, it's just an excuse to loot and destroy) have salient points, burning down neighborhoods and attacking police only serves to exacerbate the problem and further separate races.

You kind of just said that like all blacks were a part of or at least supported the riots.

Looking at Asians in America as an example; they have certainly experienced racism from time to time but they haven't rioted.

Being only 5% of the US population, maybe it's a bit more challenging for them to do so. Not to mention that they come from tons of different nations throughout Asia.
https://chrisbourg.files.wordpress.com/ ... 13-pie.jpg

and anti-Asian racism isn't accepted even among the sort of behind-closed-doors racists spoken about before in this thread.

I don't know where you got that notion from. I don't think any of us have said "'behind-closed-doors racists' ONLY talk about black people,"

[Arcanda]

Onto riot, I'd say it's the last resort the poorest and most discriminated castes of society have found to express themselves, which is very, very sad.Unfortunately, like it happenned with the Black Panthers, it gets hijacked by people interested in mayhem and nothing else.

[Edgy Opinions]

That raises a good point. While some of the things blacks riot about (for some involved, as in any riot, it's just an excuse to loot and destroy) have salient points, burning down neighborhoods and attacking police only serves to exacerbate the problem and further separate races. Looking at Asians in America as an example; they have certainly experienced racism from time to time but they haven't rioted. Now they have an average household income equal to that of non-Hispanic Caucasians, and anti-Asian racism isn't accepted even among the sort of behind-closed-doors racists spoken about before in this thread.

>mfw fellow gentile white people say Asians/Jews don't suffer significant prejudice anymore
>is this some denial checklist?

[Romalae]

Looking at Asians in America as an example; they have certainly experienced racism from time to time but they haven't rioted. Now they have an average household income equal to that of non-Hispanic Caucasians, and anti-Asian racism isn't accepted even among the sort of behind-closed-doors racists spoken about before in this thread.

Seriously? You really believe that behind-closed-doors racists don't make reference to the "Orientals" and the "chinks" who are "taking over our schools"? You must not live here in the South.

[Patridam]

That raises a good point. While some of the things blacks riot about (for some involved, as in any riot, it's just an excuse to loot and destroy) have salient points, burning down neighborhoods and attacking police only serves to exacerbate the problem and further separate races. Looking at Asians in America as an example; they have certainly experienced racism from time to time but they haven't rioted. Now they have an average household income equal to that of non-Hispanic Caucasians, and anti-Asian racism isn't accepted even among the sort of behind-closed-doors racists spoken about before in this thread.

>mfw fellow gentile white people say Asians/Jews don't suffer significant prejudice anymore
>is this some denial checklist?

>mfw I am called gentile
>admittedly I haven't seen the inside of a synagogue in years, but still

[The Cobalt Sky]

http://mediamatters.org/mobile/blog/201 ... ael/200457
http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/stat ... arrest.JPG

Length in sentencing which is the nail in the coffin for this:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... han_whites
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/0 ... ame-crime/
https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/news/217 ... NeMAcZwNb1