|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I never claimed I was a good person. I admit I don't have a leg to stand on. You'd have enough legs to stand on if we had socialism 
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:04
|
|
L
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:58 |
|
|
Futuresight posted:I sincerely don't believe this. Do you really believe this? Police gunning down a rich black man is absolutely something well within their wheelhouse, but they would be just as happy to do it as a poor black man? Eric Garner wasn't selling cigarettes cause he was rich and bored. Alton Sterling wasn't selling cds so he could buy a bigger yacht. Etc. Being black makes you more likely to get shot by the police. Being poor makes you more likely to be shot by the police. Being both makes you even more likely to get shot by the police. American history is full of such things happening. Remember the "beer summit" from Obama's first year? And Gates was only arrested and roughed up for trying to enter his own house while being one of the most famous and distinctive-looking scholars of us literature in the entire world. Cops kill wealthy, famous blacks all the time, blow them away in their own houses or cripple them in the street, or leave them in jail to die with mortal wounds because the logic of race trumps anything about the individual. Cops don't see individuals when they see black people: they see blackness and all that means to them. It's (one reason) why the "just comply and be polite" line is such bullshit: it never matters what a black person does or says, or whether they've been twice as good and made it and are accepted by all the white people they know. Cops only see an individual if they're dealing with a white person who is pretty or dressed well. You ever see that body cam footage of the cops stopping and tasing a black guy because they think they're at a different address than they're actually at, and they pull out a photo of the guy they're looking for and tell the dude it's him, even though he looks nothing like the man in the photo and lives at a different address? How does that happen, do you think?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Hegemommy/status/911234443011960833
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:22
|
|
|
Hey look its the guy who went to a Trump fundraiser at one of his hotels and was backed by scurrilous dark money slipped into the pockets of the guy who stole the seat that was supposed to go to Merrick Garland what are the odds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
At this point I would wager a finger there is actual quid-pro-quo going on behind the scenes with Gorsuch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
Sounds like grounds for impeachment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:At this point I would wager a finger there is actual quid-pro-quo going on behind the scenes with Gorsuch. Betsy Devos gave thousands of dollars to every single Senator who voted for her confirmation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Maybe Gorsuch will get wrapped into the Russian poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
karthun posted:Sounds like grounds for impeachment. Dude could kill someone during oral arguments and it wouldn't even get out of committee.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Betsy Devos gave thousands of dollars to every single Senator who voted for her confirmation. I mean in a more direct "I will now accept this payment you are giving me to make this ruling you want because my programming necessitates such" with audio, video and a giant glittering neon sign flashing 'bribe' behind Charles and David Koch, Rebekkah Mercer and every rapist in America.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:A poor white guy with $5 to his name is still at an immense advantage to a poor black guy at the same poverty level if only for the fact that a white guy named John Smith will have a far easier time getting a job than a black guy named Tayvon Prince. Many of the working poor with single digit (or less) net worth are employed, housed, and are making minimum wage. They usually just have loads of debt, so that they can't really save anything. There are racial issues with the amount of debt and interest rate that people can get, but a loan at unaffordable % interest is just as bad as a loan at (unaffordable+2) % interest. And in Chicago at least, almost all of the panhandlers and buskers that I saw were black.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:At this point I would wager a finger there is actual quid-pro-quo going on behind the scenes with Gorsuch. No poo poo. I don't care if it makes me loiuse mensch, it's likely Russian money at this point. The GOP is literally paying trumps legal fees with donations from Russian oligarchs for gently caress sake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Well that manages to top Clarence Thomas getting to hear a case on the constitutionality of Obamacare while his wife was a paid lobbyist against the law.... How is this remotely appropriate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Well that manages to top Clarence Thomas getting to hear a case on the constitutionality of Obamacare while his wife was a paid lobbyist against the law.... 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:When you look at individual wealth, statistical differences are meaningless among the poor. A white man with a net worth of $9 is almost as bad off as a black woman with a net worth of $9. They both are working a meaningless job, have poor access to credit and are being screwed on rent and healthcare. It doesn't matter to the man that he belongs to a race which is on average worth 5000x more than the black woman, for whom average savings are $9. They are both struggling almost as much, the man just has to worry less about the police and harassment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
Yeah this is wildly inappropriate for a SC judge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
You know there's the classic go-to for the difference between white rich and black rich is wealthy sportz owner VS rich sportzman But another good one is Beyonce and what's his name living in a neighborhood where the richest white person is a dentist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
Democrats need to just start loving over Rs every chance they get once they retake Congress/WH. Pack the courts, start impeaching and bringing suits against every R politician that even has a whiff of corruption., etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:Yeah this is wildly inappropriate for a SC judge. He's illegitimate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:You know there's the classic go-to for the difference between white rich and black rich is wealthy sportz owner VS rich sportzman I think this was Chris Rock. He talked about how he's made a bunch of movies, is an extremely famous comedian, and is a crazy outlier of the American experience as far as wealth goes. His black neighbors are things like NFL or NBA players. His white neighbors are things like doctors or dentists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
If there were any justice in the world this motherfucker would be the first one up against the wall when the revolution comes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:21
|
|
|
Futuresight posted:I sincerely don't believe this. Do you really believe this? Police gunning down a rich black man is absolutely something well within their wheelhouse, but they would be just as happy to do it as a poor black man? Eric Garner wasn't selling cigarettes cause he was rich and bored. Alton Sterling wasn't selling cds so he could buy a bigger yacht. Etc. Being black makes you more likely to get shot by the police. Being poor makes you more likely to be shot by the police. Being both makes you even more likely to get shot by the police. It's kinda hard to tell at a glance whether someone is rich, and even then I think a rich black person would probably be more likely to face problems from the police than a poor white person. It would definitely be a closer comparison than "poor black person vs poor white person", but I still wouldn't bet on the rich black person getting the best treatment. Grapplejack posted:Maaaan KM You've been here long enough and have talked with enough (far)leftists, you know that they don't put any emphasis on race outside of class relations. You aren't going to convince them otherwise because that's baked into how they view communism. You're not wrong about the far left having this problem, but you absolutely are wrong if you think the "regular/not-far" left is better than them in this regard. edit: I think this really gets the core of my only issue related to the whole debate from before; I think policing the far left for racism is a good and reasonable thing to do, but I strongly disagree with the framing as the left being strictly inferior to mainstream liberals on issues of race, and this is absolutely a common thing both in the media and as expressed by individuals. I believe it's a perspective largely caused by a severe myopia in terms of being completely unaware of American politics prior to the last decade or so. GoluboiOgon posted:When you look at individual wealth, statistical differences are meaningless among the poor. A white man with a net worth of $9 is almost as bad off as a black woman with a net worth of $9. They both are working a meaningless job, have poor access to credit and are being screwed on rent and healthcare. It doesn't matter to the man that he belongs to a race which is on average worth 5000x more than the black woman, for whom average savings are $9. They are both struggling almost as much, the man just has to worry less about the police and harassment. Nah, I think you're really understating the non-material impacts of racism. Just stuff like hearing someone say racial slurs or whatever is gonna cause a lot of psychological harm. It can be kinda hard to understand this if you aren't part of a marginalized population yourself, but that sort of poo poo adds up and takes a toll on a person. Guy Goodbody posted:But can't we fight inequality and also fighting institutional racism? I don't understand why people act like it's an either/or choice, or that if someone brings up inequality without mentioning racism in the same sentence. that means they don't care about racism. I generally agree, but I can understand why people would want to ensure the topic receives attention and why it's a pretty bad look if someone responds like "look we're obviously dealing with it so stop complaining!" Like, someone demanding an explanation about how a leftist politician wants to address racism-related issues is reasonable. Sometimes it's done as a transparent attack against the left, but that isn't always the case. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 03:36 on Sep 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:21
|
|
|
I hope the other 8 SC judges are just constantly mean to him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Well that manages to top Clarence Thomas getting to hear a case on the constitutionality of Obamacare while his wife was a paid lobbyist against the law.... I trust Clarence Thomas more than any other Justice in living history when it comes to perceived conflicts of interest. His judicial philosophy may be insane and horrific, but by God he adheres to it (except regarding hate speech). I trust Gorsuch, euphemistically, below average.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
My just-now self-appointed task of going through the yearly lists of people killed by police in the US to double check things has lead me to these conclusions: 1) Mental illness is also a big factor. I had forgotten. 2) I'm reassured that poverty is very much a significant factor, in addition to race and mental health status. 3) If you still want to say poverty is not an important factor in death by police then be my guest cause I'm switching my brain off the subject for a while.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:And in Chicago at least, almost all of the panhandlers and buskers that I saw were black. Hmm, if the poor whites and black people have it just as bad, then why are all the panhandlers black? Wouldn't it fall along the demographic lines? Maybe there is something about being black that means they have to turn to begging more than their fellow white destitute people?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Michael Bennett was held at gun point in Las Vegas because he was part of a crowd running away from the sound of gunfire. And he was lucky to get off with just that. A similar thing happened in Israel a couple years back - a terrorist shot up a bus station, and a security guard decided a random black guy running from the bullets might be a second shooter. Except that the guard shot him, and then he was literally loving lynched by a crowd of bystanders. Nobody checked his wallet to see if he was poor or rich when that happened.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:And he was lucky to get off with just that. A similar thing happened in Israel a couple years back - a terrorist shot up a bus station, and a security guard decided a random black guy running from the bullets might be a second shooter. Except that the guard shot him, and then he was literally loving lynched by a crowd of bystanders. Nobody checked his wallet to see if he was poor or rich when that happened. People actually ran up to kick him in the face as he was bleeding out. It's hard to overstate the bloodthirst running through the scene.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 04:18
|
|
|
Aves Maria! posted:Democrats need to just start loving over Rs every chance they get once they retake Congress/WH. Pack the courts, start impeaching and bringing suits against every R politician that even has a whiff of corruption., etc. They had this chance in 2008 and boy that sure worked out well, didn't it? Out of Iraq and Afghanistan, cracking down on all the illegal foreclosures, restoring the 50% of Black America wealth wiped out by financial criminals, the end of the surveillance state... Oh, wait. Huh. Main Paineframe posted:And he was lucky to get off with just that. A similar thing happened in Israel a couple years back - a terrorist shot up a bus station, and a security guard decided a random black guy running from the bullets might be a second shooter. Except that the guard shot him, and then he was literally loving lynched by a crowd of bystanders. Nobody checked his wallet to see if he was poor or rich when that happened. And it's incidents like this which are the base for leftists' hard line on ending America's support of Israel as an apartheid state.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
People seem to misunderstand the interplay of class and race. The poor are all oppressed economically. Minorities face discrimination. Poor minorities face both economic and racial discrimination. That said, poor folks are all in pretty bad shape, white and black. Poor minorities face problems that are caused by racism, but additionally problems caused by poverty, and racism causes the poor to disproportionately be minorities. Better off minorities have issues with racism, but none with poverty, and are more able to cope with the issues of racism due to their money and influence. Ending racism is a great and necessary thing, but it will only end the problems of middle class and upper class minorities. Poverty is a separate and necessary thing to fight, and both must be addressed in order to fully end the problems faced by minorities, a disproportionate number of whom are poor due to the effects of racism and historical injustice.MLK posted:I want to say to you as I move to my conclusion, as we talk about "Where do we go from here?" that we must honestly face the fact that the movement must address itself to the question of restructuring the whole of American society. There are forty million poor people here, and one day we must ask the question, "Why are there forty million poor people in America?" And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising a question about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I'm simply saying that more and more, we've got to begin to ask questions about the whole society. We are called upon to help the discouraged beggars in life's marketplace. But one day we must come to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. It means that questions must be raised. And you see, my friends, when you deal with this you begin to ask the question, "Who owns the oil?" You begin to ask the question, "Who owns the iron ore?" You begin to ask the question, "Why is it that people have to pay water bills in a world that's two-thirds water?" These are words that must be said. So, don't fall into the trap of assuming that you are either for economic justice or social justice. The two are connected, and in the US one cannot be addressed without fixing the other.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
Futuresight posted:My just-now self-appointed task of going through the yearly lists of people killed by police in the US to double check things has lead me to these conclusions: What the gently caress are you even trying to say?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 05:55
|
|
|
Aves Maria! posted:Democrats need to just start loving over Rs every chance they get once they retake Congress/WH. Pack the courts, start impeaching and bringing suits against every R politician that even has a whiff of corruption., etc. Make DC and Puerto Rico states so Dems get 4 more senators
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 05:58
|
|
|
Pohl posted:What the gently caress are you even trying to say? A few posters are apparently trying rather hard to downplay systematic racism.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:A few posters are apparently trying rather hard to downplay systematic racism. I guess the white mans burden never ends.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:So, don't fall into the trap of assuming that you are either for economic justice or social justice. The two are connected, and in the US one cannot be addressed without fixing the other. No poo poo, we can do both. The push-back comes when people talk about economic justice as a singular force that will heal everything, which isn't true. Racism in it's myriad of forms has to be addressed head on, economic change alone is not going to fix it. Sure, people of color will gain under a fairer economic system, but that isn't going to change the broader social issues. This isn't hard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
Pohl posted:No poo poo, we can do both. The push-back comes when people talk about economic justice as a singular force that will heal everything, which isn't true. Racism in it's myriad of forms has to be addressed head on, economic change alone is not going to fix it. Sure, people of color will gain under a fairer economic system, but that isn't going to change the broader social issues. This isn't hard. The problem is that the Democrats have generally been focusing on fighting racism without addressing economic inequality. This is primarily due to the fact that economic inequality feeds the rich donors that the party gets it's donations from. People have been trying to push the Democrats to a more balanced situation, and instead of advocating for economic justice many Democrats and pundits insist that focusing on economic inequality is racist. "Single payer is great, but will it solve racism?" Pure economic reforms will actually tend to help minorities more than whites, simply because racism has made the poor disproportionately black. This whole conversation is going on because of this false dichotomy between the two forms of justice, which is merely a tool employed by politicians to justify doing what their donors want, no matter the human cost.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
Saying "The Democrats have been too focused on fighting racism to care about economics" is way too generous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
Yeah, it's also been obvious for a long time that democrats don't care about black people and will always betray them. Obama's relationship to the criminal justice system and prison labor is a good example. So I don't really know where they get the racial justice angle. Wasn't there just s survey indicating a ten-point drop in support from black women since the election?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:It's important to note that whites statistically still have (I hope I am remembering this correctly) 86x the net wealth of black families. Even poor white families will statistically have more net wealth. Also opiates are not just a "poor person thing". It's also frustrating that addiction has become something to fix now that the focus is on white people, meanwhile black people have bee left out in the cold despite trying to deal with addiction in their communities for decades, despite begging for help. And while I'm on this, black men are way more likely to get stopped by cops, even though whites are way more likely to actually have drugs on them. These are good points and an excellent observation, and I'll have to think about that tendency and my priorities. My thinking was less "Racism -> Capitalism hurts whites" and more "Racism, forget about economics -> Life still sucks for poors who aren't targeted by a racist system and culture, shouldn't we aim for more than that?" Aves Maria! posted:Democrats need to just start loving over Rs every chance they get once they retake Congress/WH. Pack the courts, start impeaching and bringing suits against every R politician that even has a whiff of corruption., etc. The Democrats have neither the desire nor the guts to do this, because they still view Congressional Republicans as fellows and comrades. GoluboiOgon posted:Pure economic reforms will actually tend to help minorities more than whites, simply because racism has made the poor disproportionately black. When fairly applied, yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:58 |
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:The problem is that the Democrats have generally been focusing on fighting racism without addressing economic inequality. This is primarily due to the fact that economic inequality feeds the rich donors that the party gets it's donations from. People have been trying to push the Democrats to a more balanced situation, and instead of advocating for economic justice many Democrats and pundits insist that focusing on economic inequality is racist. "Single payer is great, but will it solve racism?" Pure economic reforms will actually tend to help minorities more than whites, simply because racism has made the poor disproportionately black. This whole conversation is going on because of this false dichotomy between the two forms of justice, which is merely a tool employed by politicians to justify doing what their donors want, no matter the human cost. Once again, changing the economic inequality will not stop racism, though it may help people being affected by racism. There is a dichotomy because you refuse to accept the fact that paying people of color more will not end racism. More money going to the poor black sections of our society is not going to solve this problem. Also, I'm calling bullshit that our Democrats haven't addressed economic inequality. Sure, they haven't been lockstep on this, but many have tried.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 06:55
|
|