Ferguson unrest

[cybercoma]

Are you unable to make the distinction between someone trained in a medical science and someone who is simply alive? Being alive and a certain colour does not qualify you in anything.

Look, go read up on privilege. I'm sick of trying to educate you. You have got to be the single most blind person to their own privilege that I have ever encountered. I've posted articles and I've tried to explain to you why colourblindness can be racism. If you don't understand how black people talking about their experiences being black is more valid than you, as a white person, defining their experiences for them, then I don't know what to tell you. At best you're wrong and ignorant, but people have been going on for pages trying to educate you, so at worst you're nothing more than a racist who's completely unwilling to grow.

[TimG]

You really don't get it? We're talking about racism. If you don't think people of minority races in our society have a more valid opinion on whether or not they themselves experience racism

Actually, no. "experiencing racism" requires that one make assumptions about the motivations of other people. Being a member of a minority does not make one an expert at inferring the motivations of others. If anything, someone who is obsessed with the race issue to the point where they write an op-ed about is more likely to make mistakes inferring the motivations of others and see racism where there is none. Edited December 23, 2014 by TimG

[TimG]

Look, go read up on privilege.

Logically that is the same as telling someone to go read the Bible. We all know that this "priviledge" stuff is part of your ideological beliefs but that is all it is: your beliefs. It is not an objective fact and it is rather silly to treat it as if it is a fact. Edited December 23, 2014 by TimG

[Smallc]

You really don't get it? We're talking about racism. If you don't think people of minority races in our society have a more valid opinion on whether or not they themselves experience racism than you do, then discussing these things with you is absolutely beyond reason.

I don't believe that they do. I think many people, whether we're talking about racism or anything else, can choose to be a victim. I think too many people do.

[Smallc]

Look, go read up on privilege. I'm sick of trying to educate you. You have got to be the single most blind person to their own privilege that I have ever encountered. I've posted articles and I've tried to explain to you why colourblindness can be racism. If you don't understand how black people talking about their experiences being black is more valid than you, as a white person, defining their experiences for them, then I don't know what to tell you. At best you're wrong and ignorant, but people have been going on for pages trying to educate you, so at worst you're nothing more than a racist who's completely unwilling to grow.

You're becoming very insulting. I think you need to take a break from this discussion.

[Black Dog]

Actually, no. "experiencing racism" requires that one make assumptions about the motivations of other people. Being a member of a minority does not make one an expert at inferring the motivations of others. If anything, someone who is obsessed with the race issue to the point where they write an op-ed about is more likely to make mistakes inferring the motivations of others and see racism where there is none.

This is fuckin' funny and completely self contradictory and I guarantee you have no idea why, which just makes it even funnier.

[Black Dog]

I don't believe that they do. I think many people, whether we're talking about racism or anything else, can choose to be a victim. I think too many people do.

So victimhood is a choice?

You're becoming very insulting. I think you need to take a break from this discussion.

LISTEN TO THIS GUY HE EXPERT.

Edited December 23, 2014 by Black Dog

[TimG]

This is fuckin' funny and completely self contradictory and I guarantee you have no idea why, which just makes it even funnier.

I know that people obsessed with race think they are the only people entitled to decide what motivates other people (i.e. only they are allowed to decide if an act is racist or not). I think that notion is ridiculous even though I know you believe it to be true. Edited December 23, 2014 by TimG

[Black Dog]

I know that people obsessed with race think they are the only people entitled to decide what motivates other people (i.e. only they are allowed to decide if an act is racist or not). I reject that notion even though I know you believe it to be true.

Obviously you are unfamiliar with the first law of holes.

Edited December 23, 2014 by Black Dog

[cybercoma]

You're becoming very insulting. I think you need to take a break from this discussion.

I think you need to take a break from this discussion to check your privilege, instead of acting like you get to define others' experiences for them. You're sitting here saying that black people's opinions on racism aren't any more valid than a white person telling them they don't experience racism because those days are over. That is an insult and it's racist garbage to boot. I'm sorry you don't see that and it hurts your tender sensibilities, but your arguments are in fact patriarchal racist nonsense regardless of whether you think they are or not and regardless of whether you're insulted by them being labelled that way.

[cybercoma]

This is fuckin' funny and completely self contradictory and I guarantee you have no idea why, which just makes it even funnier.

It's unbelievable the ignorant garbage that comes off some people's keyboards. Like intent has anything whatsoever to do with racism. It's like these people have never cracked a book in their lives.

[TimG]

Obviously you are unfamiliar with the first law of holes.

Like I said: you have your world view driven by ideology. But your ideology is just an opinion: it is not facts. Your problem is you are so wrapped up in your own narrow ideology that you get confused when people make arguments based on a different world view. Edited December 23, 2014 by TimG

[Black Dog]

Like I said: you have your world view driven by ideology. But your ideology is just an opinion: it is not facts. Your problem is you are so wrapped up in your own narrow ideology that you get confused when people make arguments based on a different world view.

Hmm. This looks to me like you're making assumptions about the motivations of other people. Can I ask what qualifications you possess that make you an expert at inferring the motivations of others?

[Bonam]

Cybercoma and Black Dog... subscribing to your ideas of racism and "white privilege" is not a matter of "cracking open a book" and "getting educated" about these issues. These are not factual, objective issues like physics or math. If someone makes a mistake with their calculus, yeah, tell them to go crack a book and get educated. But when it comes to your ideas of racism and white privilege, it is a matter of your political bent and ideology... the references you provide are likewise steeped in ideological premises and sociological assumptions that the people you are "debating" with do not agree with (for good reason). I've read plenty of them and remain firmly unconvinced, just like reading right wing ideological rants might leave you similarly unconvinced (also for good reason).

You would be best served to stop with the condescension and, if you actually are interested in winning anyone over to your point of view, presenting your arguments in a calm, rational, reasoned way. Or if you're just here to throw around your thinly veiled insults, feel free to continue until you get suspended again.

[Black Dog]

Cybercoma and Black Dog... subscribing to your ideas of racism and "white privilege" is not a matter of "cracking open a book" and "getting educated" about these issues. These are not factual, objective issues like physics or math. If someone makes a mistake with their calculus, yeah, tell them to go crack a book and get educated. But when it comes to your ideas of racism and white privilege, it is a matter of your political bent and ideology... the references you provide are likewise steeped in ideological premises and sociological assumptions that the people you are "debating" with do not agree with (for good reason). I've read plenty of them and remain firmly unconvinced, just like reading right wing ideological rants might leave you similarly unconvinced (also for good reason).

You would be best served to stop with the condescension and, if you actually are interested in winning anyone over to your point of view, presenting your arguments in a calm, rational, reasoned way. Or if you're just here to throw around your thinly veiled insults, feel free to continue until you get suspended again.

OK COOL THX DAD

Like, seriously: grow some self-awareness. And if you actually have the knowledge you say, prove it for a change. 'cause you sure talk a lot about how much you'd know, but your output doesn't jive with that.

Edited December 23, 2014 by Black Dog

[TimG]

Hmm. This looks to me like you're making assumptions about the motivations of other people. Can I ask what qualifications you possess that make you an expert at inferring the motivations of others?

It is my opinion. I am not claiming it as a fact. If you want to say all of the stuff about privilege and colorblindness is nothing but your opinion then you are entitled to it and I am entitled to mine. Edited December 23, 2014 by TimG

[On Guard for Thee]

good point BD. You could get the impression by the number of assumptions trotted out as "fact" that we must have Sigmund Freud himself posting here.

[Shady]

What exactly are the anti-police people arguing in this thread now?

[Black Dog]

It is my opinion. I am not claiming it as a fact. If you want to say all of the stuff about privilege and colorblindness is nothing but your opinion then you are entitled to it and I am entitled to mine.

No, you aren't entitled to your opinion. You're entitled to what you can argue for. And you've completely sunk your own argument by making the kind of baseless assumptions about other people's motives you accuse others of making.

[TimG]

No, you aren't entitled to your opinion. You're entitled to what you can argue for. And you've completely sunk your own argument by making the kind of baseless assumptions about other people's motives you accuse others of making.

Excuse me? Unlike yours, my argument is not built on assumptions about the motivations of others. Remove those side comments and my argument still stands: people who perceive racism are making assumptions about the motivations of other people. These assumptions can be wrong which means people can perceive racism where there is none. i.e. it is not enough to hear the opinion of someone about their "experiences of racism" because those experiences may not be connected to any real racism. Edited December 23, 2014 by TimG

[Black Dog]

Excuse me? Unlike yours, my argument is not built on assumptions about the motivations of others.

Being a member of a minority does not make one an expert at inferring the motivations of others. If anything, someone who is obsessed with the race issue to the point where they write an op-ed about is more likely to make mistakes inferring the motivations of others and see racism where there is none.

Assumption of motivations, "obsession with race".

Your problem is you are so wrapped up in your own narrow ideology that you get confused when people make arguments based on a different world view.

Assumption of motivations, "narrow ideology".

You were saying?

Remove those side comments and my argument still stands: people who perceive racism are making assumptions about the motivations of other people.

Based on actions and other contextual cues.

These assumptions can be wrong which means people can perceive racism where there is none. i.e. it is not enough to hear the opinion of someone about their "experiences of racism" because those experiences may not be connected to any real racism.

Which doesn't exclude the possibility that those experiences are connected to racism after all. If black people might see racism where it's not, it also stands to reason that white people might not see racism where it actually is due to their own preconceptions and assumptions. You'd rather err on the side of "no racist;" why? Is it perhaps you consider minority views to be inherently less valid?

Edited December 23, 2014 by Black Dog

[TimG]

If black people might see racism where it's not, it also stands to reason that white people might not see racism where it actually is due to their own preconceptions and assumptions.

The only one who really knows is the accused. Other people, whether they take one side or the other are in no position to really know what the motivation was. This tangent started by someone claiming that a black person is better able to identify racism than someone who is not. That statement is still false even if non-black people can also make errors identifying cases of racism. Edited December 23, 2014 by TimG

[Smallc]

It's unbelievable the ignorant garbage that comes off some people's keyboards. Like intent has anything whatsoever to do with racism. It's like these people have never cracked a book in their lives.

Without intent there can't be racism. Racism is an intentional attack.

[eyeball]

What exactly are the anti-police people arguing in this thread now?

Speaking for myself, I'm still arguing that police methods are too forceful and violent resulting in unnecessary death and suffering and they're getting worse because of the general freak-out and security-ism that's followed 9/11. First things first there needs to be a serious attitude adjustment starting with law-makers, senior bureaucrats and enforcement institutions who need to wind down their post-9/11 fear and angst.

Police on the street need way more training in how to assess situations and how to de-escalate and de-fuse them before resorting to force which could benefit greatly from the development and employment of a wider range of non-lethal methods and tools. Restraining/immobilizing technology involving the use of net-guns, fast setting foam, anaesthetic dart guns (TTC streetcar shooting comes to mind), better energy conducting devices etc. Simply waiting out certain situations as opposed to going in guns blazing would do wonders. Many police should effectively be trained as mental-health/illness first responders with a significant amount of psychiatric training. Instead we're equipping and encouraging them to react like SWAT teams.

As for defusing and de-escalating the tensions causing society to come unhinged to the point it's starting to resemble the classic overcrowded rat cage...I guess that's a different issue, but I bet if we could address it we'd have a lot less cops-gone-wild videos showing up on you-tube.

[guyser]

Without intent there can't be racism. Racism is an intentional attack.

I am not of the same opinion, but am having a hard time expressing why I think it isnt.

What of the learned behaviour most racists obtain. Think of little kids using the N term. FOr most, they probably have no idea what it means, just that daddy uses it all the time. Theres no intent on the childs part , at least in his early age/development.

Same goes with religion, which I always amusingly found similar. Get 'em while their young ...right? Once it is ingrained it is very hard to oust.

Dont I know that. But of others who are now atheist (as I am ) who doesnt look to the sky and say Oh lord , or dear god when watching something stupid or someone has done something silly.

I suppose my point is,. or question, is how can it be intentional when it is ingrained and learned from a very young age?