Policy Demands for Black Power, Freedom and Justice
by Mike Kimel
Policy Demands for Black Power, Freedom and Justice
Earlier this month NBC news reported:
The Movement for Black Lives — under the catch-all banner of the Black Lives Matter movement — has put together what it describes as a “clear vision of the world where black humanity and dignity is the reality.”
In the plan, titled “A Vision for Black Lives: Policy Demands for Black Power, Freedom and Justice,” dozens of established activist and advocacy groups joined forces to offer six core demands and 40 policy priorities.
It is clear that the demands cannot be met. This is not a comment on whether the Black Lives Movement is serious, about whether their goals are desirable, or about whether they will be able to force society to take their demands seriously. Rather, it is a statement that their demands are not internally consistent. Simply put, the solution to their grievances in some areas will necessarily make other issues which they (and the rest of us, for that matter) are concerned about worse.
One example from the section entitled End the War on Black People begins with this bullet point:
For Black girls, the U.S.’s failure to address gender-based violence, which they experience at greater levels than any other group, is paramount to the criminalization they experience. In fact, sexual abuse is one of the primary predictors of girls’ entry into the juvenile justice system, with girls often being routed to the system specifically because of their victimization. For instance, girls who are victims of sex trafficking are often arrested on prostitution charges. The punitive nature of this system is ill-equipped to support young girls through the violence and trauma they’ve experienced, which further subjects them to sexual victimization and a lifelong path of criminalization and abuse.
Ending gender-based violence is, of course, a laudable goal. If it has secondary benefits like preventing girls and women from a lifelong path of criminalization and abuse, so much the better.
Now, from the same page:
While Black people represent about 13 percent of the population of the U.S., we represent upwards of 40 percent of those caged in jails, prisons, and juvenile detention.
More:
The rate at which the U.S. imprisons its people and the staggering percentage of imprisoned people who are Black indicates the country’s orientation toward containment and control as its primary modes of dealing with the issues created by social, political, and economic inequities. The use of imprisonment and increasingly long sentences as “catch all” responses to everything from economic desperation, to substance dependence, to nonconforming gender identities also has devastating effects on the communities from which imprisoned people come.
Now, alternatives to incarceration do exist. However, those alternatives tend to be less likely to limit a person’s opportunity to commit crimes against people outside of jail.
Now, from the American Bar Association:
Overall, African Americans were victimized by intimate partners a significantly higher rates than persons of any other race between 1993 and 1998. Black females experienced intimate partner violence at a rate 35% higher than that of white females, and about 22 times the rate of women of other races. Black males experienced intimate partner violence at a rate about 62% higher than that of white males and about 2.5 times the rate of men of other races.
Also, this:
The number one killer of African-American women ages 15 to 34 is homicide at the hands of a current or former intimate partner.
A bit more recent data is available from the FBI:
The little asterisk next to the figure for White offender / Black victim indicates that “Estimate is based on 10 or fewer samples.”
Thus, Black people are more in danger of sexual violence than other groups. Additionally, the overwhelming majority, and perhaps substantially all of the rapes/sexual assaults against Black people were perpetrated by other Black people.
Now, one more demand from Black Lives Matter:
An End to the Mass Surveillance of Black Communities, and the End to the Use of Technologies that Criminalize and Target Our Communities (Including IMSI Catchers, Drones, Body Cameras, and Predictive Policing Software).
So how do you reduce the rate of reduce the violence, particularly sexual violence against Black people while simultaneously reducing both the incarceration rate of Black people and surveillance of Black communities? What is the mechanism by which sexual violence is expected to decrease, other than wishful thinking? Of course, taking out the word “Black” and replacing it with “White” or “Asian” or “Hispanic” or any other group in the previous sentence would not make it any less hard to square the circle. However, the elevated rate of victimization of Black people makes the stakes that much higher when we are discussing crime in the Black community. Its a pity the Black Lives Movement and its allies either cannot or will not come up with a response that won’t make the plight of law-abiding Black people worse.
Ever give a thought to applying income levels to these findings?
I think you will find that the incarceration rates for African Americans for NON VIOLENT CRIMES are substantially greater than they are for non Hispanic whites and the principal focus of Black Lives Matter is that the police do not consider people who are black to be worth as much as white people whether it is police protecting black people who are victims of crime or gunning down unarmed black people because everyone “knows black people are prone to violence” . Personally, I am getting tired of reading your posts Cactus
EMichael,
Whether the crime disparity is caused by income differences or is the byproduct of something else, the effect of following the BLM recommendations on the number of Black people who get victimized by violent crimes will be the same. To me, the important thing is generating fewer violent crime victims. Having an excuse handy when one’s recommendations result in more murders and assaults isn’t a win in my book.
Terry,
Believe it or not, you aren’t required to read my posts. Nobody is testing you on them.
In general, both murder victims and murder perps have long records. (Working off memory, to use one example, in Baltimore the number is upward of 80%. Sorry I don’t have time to look it up.). Additional, any lawyer will tell you cases are often pled down. Reduce the number of arrests or stops for petty offenses. Work out what happens next.
Mike,
Then why did you compare different racial groups?
What is the relevance, particularly considering “the effect of following the BLM recommendations on the number of Black people who get victimized by violent crimes will be the same.”?
“[Any] lawyer will tell you cases are often pled down.”
More often, it is the prosecutor who offers a deal. This should be made illegal. If the prosecutors have the evidence, then they should take it to court. But they often don’t, so they offer “deals,” which are great for the public defender, who gets paid the same no matter how much or little he does for his client, but not so great for the defendant, who is pressured to plead GUILTY to something he did not do to avoid the possibility of a harsher sentence for something else he did not do.
EMichael,
Let’s see. BLM says
1. Reduce sexual assaults against Black people
2. Reduce incarceration of Black people
If the primary source of perpetrators of sexual assaults against Black people was non-Black people, it would be possible to simultaneously follow recommendations 1 and 2. The problem is that the data shows 1 and 2 are in opposition. Policy recommendations that are not internally consistent, that are, in fact self-contradictory, don’t generate good outcomes if followed, wishful thinking notwithstanding. Since the stakes are high (lives are literally at stake), if a group with the ear of a candidate for President pushes for policies that cannot work, it is a problem.
Warren,
If people in a community are constantly being charged with crimes they didn’t commit, a reduced police presence won’t increase crime in that community, all else being equal. The Washington Post had stories looking at violent crimes in the post Michael Brown shooting period and it seems that in areas where policing was decreased due to increased scrutiny of police, violent crimes have increased noticeably.
Data 1 and 2 are not in opposition.
You can certainly reduce black incarceration without having an increase in assaults on black people.
Also, I think you have minimized the different processes that BLM is “demanding” and concentrating on your own agenda.
“If people in a community are constantly being charged with crimes they didn’t commit, a reduced police presence won’t increase crime in that community, all else being equal.”
Not true. Those who actually ARE committing crime, and those inclined to do so but who are afraid of being caught, WILL commit more crime if their odds of being caught decrease. That does not change just because other people are occasionally being charged with their crimes.
“You can certainly reduce black incarceration without having an increase in assaults on black people.”
How?
I’m perplexed at your interest in the general subject matter that one might label “general contradictions in the social complexity of criminal behavior in the face of wide spread poverty.” Oh, I forgot to add, “among a black population.” Why is it that your post only describes a “problem” as you seem to suggest rather than providing some frame work for solutions?
I suggest looking closely at the roots of the several problems which you describe. Try to keep in mind that I don’t think any black person, activist, clergy, police agent or elected official is saying that prisons should be emptied of black prisoners. You seem to have missed the call for better a judicial system that does a better job of separating the innocent from the guilty. Yes, that’s asking a lot of the criminal justice system. Also we could slow down the rate of incarceration and attempt to aim more precisely at the issue of fitting the punishment to the crime once the system has shown that it can actually differentiate between guilt and innocence.
Now how do we deal with sexual assault? You sound like you just landed on Earth, in the U.S.A. It’s apparently aq nearly rampant problem that cuts across all races and levels of education so we can’t just attribute its occurrence to poverty. Roger Ailes and Bill Cosby are juswt two recent examples. Then there are all of those priests and throw in a more than hand full of teachers. Seems like a popular new game. Screw the tail, on what ever moves. So dealing with black/black, or white/black or white/black sexual assault is going to take a systems wide approach. That’s social system by the way, and all social systems seem to require the tweeking.
So you can see that there is no contradiction between less incarceration and reducing sexual assault. Both are laudable efforts, but each is a some what different phenomenon though with a degree of over lap. Ours is a truly fucked up society. Part of the evidence is this obtuse post you decided to present to us here at AB, an economics blog, though we do concern oureselves with vexing social issues. Have a nice day.
Warren,
If you assume that the cops are, more often than not, getting the wrong guy, then yes, we can all be made better off with less policing. Are the jails primarily filled with people who are not guilty?
Terry,
From what I can tell, your second to the last paragraph suggests locking up more perps, including the wealthy, priests, etc. I tend to agree, even if you don’t stick to that in your next paragraph.
Sorry. My last comment was meant for Jack.
Locking up those guilty of a crime is a standard operating procedure in most jurisdictions in this country. For that matter locking up anyone that a prosecutor can even tenuously connect to a crime is standard procedure in the U.S. It’s getting the connection between guilt and the crime accurate that seems to elude most participants in the process. It would seem that only the accused knows for sure who should and should not be incarcerated for a particular crime. I was trying to point out that in our criminal justice systems across America we seem not to have focused to much on the crime of sexual assault. Maybe that has the effect of keeping that category of crime out of incompetent hands, but then it leaves so many to suffer at the hands of real life perpetrators of such crimes. When I noted that dealing with the wide spread phenomenon of that particular class of offense would require a systems wide approach I meant, as I clearly stated, a social system. As in; let’s get folks to understand that its hands off unless invited, and then the invitation should come from another adult, not your cute little niece or nephew.
Did you stop reading at the end of that “second to the last paragraph”?
Otherwise you might have noted that I tried to make it clear that the two issues, incarceration and sexual assault, are not inextricably interconnected. Unless, of course, you’re talking about sexual assault of the incarcerated. As stated above, in the very last paragraph, “So you can see that there is no contradiction between less incarceration and reducing sexual assault. Both are laudable efforts, but each is a some what different phenomenon though with a degree of over lap. Ours is a truly fucked up society. Part of the evidence is this obtuse post you decided to present to us here at AB, an economics blog, though we do concern oureselves with vexing social issues. Have a nice day.”
“If you assume that the cops are, more often than not, getting the wrong guy….”
I am not. But without actual trials, can we know?
“But without actual trials, can we know?” Warren
That’s the point Warren. A poor dude would be in for a long haul without Perry Mason in his/her corner. For some real eye opening google search for studies on “eye witness testimony” and then pray that some old bitty never IDs you at the scene of a crime in Baltimore at some time that you were on a trip up the Alps. A trial is often a fair trial only in the sense of a county fair. It’s an entertaining spectacle.
I’m not saying that all people found guilty of a crime in this country are actually innocent of the crime. We can only guess at the numbers of innocent but “guilty” by reason of incompetence in our jails. The number of people identified as wrongly convicted keeps growing, and I think its fair to say that the more incarcerations there are, the more likely the erroneous convictions will be high. Considering that we have an out of control incarceration pace resulting from a haphazard criminal justice system raises some serious questions regarding our national moral imperatives. The fact that a white man on AB finds justification in questioning the possible conundrums within the rhetoric of the Black Lives Matter movement should draw attention to those questions.
Jack,
Spend a bit of time in one of the neighborhoods where the homicide rate is elevated, particularly after dark. Walk the streets. See if you feel that there is too much policing going on. Then ask yourself what it is like for the poor people that are law abiding who have to live in the neighborhood. Its nice that you get t condescend to me, and I don’t actually mind it if you do, but have you no pity for them?
I hate racists, and I feel I am in a discussion with some.
The idea that you cannot reduce prisons populations without increasing attacks on black people is insane.
I’m sorry, but are you of the opinion that most blacks in prison are there for committing violent crime?
Based on what, whitey?
The vast majority are there for selling weed, or crack, or crank.
Damn, I hate white people for this shit.
EMichael:
I grew up in the city of Chicago. The city and not the outlying towns and burbs. I went to Chicago Public schools and after I got out of grade school (Gray), I went to an integrated magnet school (Lane Tech). Took the CTA at 15 cents each way on Addison Avenue. Lane was a high school of 5000 boys from all over the northern part of the city. It has graduated the most PHds in the nation or those who went on to secure a PHds. We were diverse and we lived together there, next to Riverview.
What makes this scenario bad is the gov recognizes they are imprisoning people and sentencing them to long terms for nonviolent crimes. They are all about sentencing reform. Yea, so what. The real issue is being able to lawyer up in the beginning and fighting back so you do not have to plea bargain 85% of the time. Low income people need more help there and not so much on the other side. If they can get help there, the prison rate for low income people would drop drastically. Fight the system and the sentence becomes worst. Now, why would that be???
Here is a neat little study by the Center for American progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/news/2006/04/26/1917/understanding-mobility-in-america/ The system in the US has denied minorities and low income people the means to go up the ladder.
– Children from low-income families have only a 1 percent chance of reaching the top 5 percent of the income distribution, versus children of the rich who have about a 22 percent chance.
– Education, race, health and state of residence are four key channels by which economic status is transmitted from parent to child.
– African American children who are born in the bottom quartile are nearly twice as likely to remain there as adults than are white children whose parents had identical incomes, and are four times less likely to attain the top quartile.
– The difference in mobility for blacks and whites persists even after controlling for a host of parental background factors, children’s education and health, as well as whether the household was female-headed or receiving public assistance.
– After controlling for a host of parental background variables, upward mobility varied by region of origin, and is highest (in percentage terms) for those who grew up in the South Atlantic and East South Central regions, and lowest for those raised in the West South Central and Mountain regions.
– By international standards, the United States has an unusually low level of intergenerational mobility: our parents’ income is highly predictive of our incomes as adults. Intergenerational mobility in the United States is lower than in France, Germany, Sweden, Canada, Finland, Norway and Denmark. Among high-income countries for which comparable estimates are available, only the United Kingdom had a lower rate of mobility than the United States.
There is your argument.
Run,
Kudos.
There are lots of things wrong with the “justice” system that are built in…Plea bargaining has replaced jury trials as the predominate first choice for prosecutors and apparently many defense, use of court fines to fund significant per centages of police and court operations in many jurisdictions…I will find recent links.
Michael,
Been there. Done that. Fortunately I didn’t have to live in such destitute neighborhoods, but growing up in and spending my life in NYC has put me in prolonged proximity to most of Brooklyn’s most notorious parts through the past five decades. NY’s calm and copacetic these days, by comparison. I’ve worked Williamsburg, prior to gentrification. Bed-Stuy in the sixties and East NY in the seventies. I used to go into Manhattan and gawk at the goings on in Times Square when I was a teen just to see how sleazy life could be. I never felt threatened. I only saw the police presence when they swooped in to make a drug bust at some local den of iniquity. Police presence is only the best our society can do to keep a lid on a heated up environment. Better schools. Better jobs. Better sanitation systems. All would go a long way to improving the quality of life for people living in ghettoized areas.
Condescending to you? I think not, unless pointing out some hard truths about your shortsightedness can be seen as condescension. Maybe its my softly sarcastic manner of characterizing the way you’ve garbled and confused the relationships between several aspects of the social framework of black life in America. BLM isn’t complaining about police presence. They’re complaining about the uselessness of some members of the police who seem not to be able to tell criminal from general civilian behavior when confronting black people. And that is happening all across the country, not just in the more violent areas of our cities.
Run & Jack,
Perhaps the neighborhoods are a bit different now than when you grew up. On Tuesday, he Chicago Trib reported (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-shootings-violence-20160808-story.html)
“A 10-year-old boy was critically hurt after being shot and at least 18 others were shot, seven of them fatally, since late Monday morning across the city.”
Wednesday there was this story (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-violence-shootings-20160809-story.html)
“At least 16 people were shot, three of them fatally, in shootings across Chicago over 12 hours Tuesday afternoon and evening, according to police.”
I haven’t checked this morning’s paper yet.
Based on past patterns, it is safe to assume that substantially all of these shootings took place in the same few neighborhoods. Lack of opportunity is a real thing, but intimidation and fear of death at the hands of thugs is a real concern for the law abiding majority in dangerous neighborhoods. Its not because there are too few violent people walking the street.
Mike:
I was gone in 68 to USMC. My parents moved out of the city as it was getting bad. I returned in 71 to my parents home in Bensenville. So is Chicago really that bad? Murder rate was lower than 25 other cities, it had a rape rate lower than 111 other cities, and Robberies and aggravated assault were lower in Chicago than many cities. No, it is not reasonable to assume they are centered in one or two areas. You are attacking a symptom. Have you read Dr. James Gilligan’s “Violence: A National Epidemic.” Pick it. It is an interesting and a short read and the Doctor goes on to examine why prisoners are violent.
The poor man’s conscience is clear; yet he is ashamed. He feels himself out of the sight of others, groping in the dark. Mankind takes no notice of him: he rambles and wanders unheeded.
In the midst of a crowd, at church, in the market…he is in as much obscurity as he would be in a garret or a cellar.
He is not disapproved, censured or reproached: he is only not seen. To be overlooked and, to know it, are intolerable. John Adams
Read the book and see what Gilligan’s suggests as the cause of violence other than lead.
Jack,
I have not said one thing about the police in this thread.
Jack,
My apologies, should have had my second cup of coffee before I tried to think.
Run,
I will track it down this weekend.
“Drawing on firsthand experience as a prison psychiatrist, his own family history, and literature, Gilligan unveils the motives of men who commit horrifying crimes, men who will not only kill others but destroy themselves rather than suffer a loss of self-respect. With devastating clarity, Gilligan traces the role that shame plays in the etiology of murder and explains why our present penal system only exacerbates it. Brilliantly argued, harrowing in its portraits of the walking dead, Violence should be read by anyone concerned with this national epidemic and its widespread consequences. ” Kind of fits the John Adams Quote http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/210428.Violence
I started writing on this topic a decade ago. Every now and then it pops up again on some blog. A little more about it. This is long and just a portion of my words; but it does make my point:
While many US citizens still believe in the American Dream, Tom Hertz noted (“Understanding Mobility in America,” 2006 Table 1); of all those born into the lowest quartile of income, 46% had a more likely outcome of remaining there as adults. If black and born into the lowest quartile, the likelihood of remaining there was 63%. James Gilligan takes it a step further in his study (“Reflections on A National Epidemic – Violence” Gilligan); quoting H.A. Bulhan’s reference to structural violence. “For every 1% increase in unemployment in the United States, there was an increased mortality of 37,000 deaths per year (natural and violent) including ~2,000 more suicides and homicides than might otherwise occur.” Or explained in simpler terms, for every 1% increase in Unemployment, we can expect to see increases in the mortality rate by 2%, homicides and imprisonments by 6%, and infant mortality by 5%. Since WWII, the unemployment rate for blacks has been twice as high as that of whites. (Frantz Fanon and the Psychology of Oppression; H.A Bulhan; Mental Illness and the Economy, M.H Brenner). Hertz points to a decrease in income mobility and Bulhan points to higher crime, violence, and death rates due to unemployment. Both Hertz and Bulhan point out the impact for those of the lowest income brackets and black minorities even more so. The resultant increases in violence, homicides and imprisonments can be attributed more so to poverty relating imprisonments as a result of being tough on crime. Hypertension amongst those living in dangerous urbanized environments is also higher when compared to those of high income environments. Given the last 8 years of poor economy; is it any wonder that death rates are higher due to violence or natural causes, more people are going to prison, more of those going to prison are black minorities, and more are going and staying longer in prison due to stringent sentencing.
“The poor man’s conscience is clear . . . he does not feel guilty and has no reason to . . . yet, he is ashamed. Mankind takes no notice of him. He rambles unheeded. In the midst of a crowd; at a church; in the market . . . he is in as much obscurity as he would be in a garret or a cellar. He is not disapproved, censured, or reproached; he is not seen . . . To be wholly overlooked, and to know it, are intolerable.” John Adams
For the poor white man in the 19th century, poverty added the injury of being socially invisible when compared to a man of wealth or prominence. Society not acknowledging their presence created a class of insignificance effectively shamed into oblivion as a class not worthy of notice. Adams did not speak of the black man and Slavery took it one step further creating a stigma worst than that of poverty and more shame inducing. Slaves were economic chattel to be disposed of at the discretion of their owners without observance of their being at a separate class lower than that of the poorest white man. While not as overt in the 20th century, the distinction of black slave versus poor white man has kept the class system alive and well in the US in the development of a discriminatory informal caste system. This distraction of a class level lower than the poorest of the white has kept them from concentrating on the disproportionate, and growing, distribution of wealth and income in the US. For the lower class, an allowed luxury, a place in the hierarchy and a sure form of self esteem insurance.
Sennett and Cobb (1972) observed that class distinction sets up a contest between upper and lower class with the lower social class always losing and promulgating a perception amongst themselves the educated and upper classes are in a position to judge and draw a conclusion of them being less than equal. The hidden injury is in the regard to the person perceiving himself as a piece of the woodwork or seen as a function such as “George the Porter.” It was not the status or material wealth causing the harsh feelings; but, the feeling of being treated less than equal, having little status, and the resulting shame. The answer for many was violence.
Tocquelle observed that the French Revolution occurred when conditions were improving for the poor. Again in the sixties as conditions were improving for blacks, the rates of crime increased. The underlying basis are expectations greater than the actual achievements creating a larger gap than before. As of late, criticism of the Clinton administration has been made of not doing enough even though employment increased well beyond what is considered full economic employment then and exceeding the Bush numbers of today. Many of the poor and blacks enjoyed a better income status as the rising economic tide lifted them also; but, the gap was not closed between the lower and upper classes and incomes. They perceived themselves as being no better off. The “Horatio Alger” myth made many feel that their failure to rise in class and close the gap was their own fault caused by issues of personal inferiority.
For the same reasons, Malcolm X promoted separatism and Kenneth Clark promoted integration . . . to save blacks from implied shame and humiliation of being less as imposed by white society. Segregation is imposed upon others thought to be superior and Separatism is a voluntary state. Malcolm X went on to say the American white man is not inherently racist; it is the political, economic and social atmosphere that promotes a racist attitude and psychology in white society. While Jews and Asians have been discriminated against, they have been successful counter discrimination by maintaining their culture and self respect. The black man imported to early US was stripped of identity and culture and becoming the white man’s personal chattel.
I could argue Detroit nd what Michigan did to it till I am blue in the face. They walled that city off and cut off revenue sharing to it.
Our president has repeatedly made claims regarding the unfair treatment of blacks by our criminal justice system and so I spent a little reading up on the subject. I found the following to be interesting:
“The favorite culprits for high black prison rates include a biased legal system, draconian drug enforcement, and even prison itself. None of these explanations stands up to scrutiny. The black incarceration rate is overwhelmingly a function of black crime. Insisting otherwise only worsens black alienation and further defers a real solution to the black crime problem.”
“Racial activists usually remain assiduously silent about that problem. But in 2005, the black homicide rate was over seven times higher than that of whites and Hispanics combined, according to the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics. From 1976 to 2005, blacks committed over 52 percent of all murders in America. In 2006, the black arrest rate for most crimes was two to nearly three times blacks’ representation in the population. Blacks constituted 39.3 percent of all violent-crime arrests, including 56.3 percent of all robbery and 34.5 percent of all aggravated-assault arrests, and 29.4 percent of all property-crime arrests.
The advocates acknowledge such crime data only indirectly: by charging bias on the part of the system’s decision makers. As Obama suggested in the Martin Luther King debate, police, prosecutors, and judges treat blacks and whites differently “for the same crime.””
“Let’s start with the idea that cops over-arrest blacks and ignore white criminals. In fact, the race of criminals reported by crime victims matches arrest data. As long ago as 1978, a study of robbery and aggravated assault in eight cities found parity between the race of assailants in victim identifications and in arrests—a finding replicated many times since, across a range of crimes. No one has ever come up with a plausible argument as to why crime victims would be biased in their reports.”
(I’ll provide a link in another comment)
Ray
This too, from the same article, seems to explain why the statistics are so often misleading:
“A 1990 study of 11,000 California cases found that slight racial disparities in sentence length resulted from blacks’ prior records and other legally relevant variables. A 1994 Justice Department survey of felony cases from the country’s 75 largest urban areas discovered that blacks actually had a lower chance of prosecution following a felony than whites did and that they were less likely to be found guilty at trial. Following conviction, blacks were more likely to receive prison sentences, however—an outcome that reflected the gravity of their offenses as well as their criminal records.”
http://www.city-journal.org/html/criminal-justice-system-racist-13078.html
Ray
“We’ll be back with more Blame The Victims after this word from our sponsor, the Manhattan Institute.”
Anyway…I’m still not yet sure where I stand regarding Obama’s presidency, but, I am pretty sure that he and his guys need to work harder at analyzing statistics.
Interesting topic, Mike, I’m sorry if I have expanded the conversation too far out.
Ray
This is a nice companion piece to your post regarding PhD’s for cultural studies. The BLM manifesto reeks of a post-grad African-American Studies seminar.
It isn’t that I have any interest in blaming the victims, but I do find truth very interesting. And quite often, the mainstream views, conventional wisdom, media interpretations of statistics (especially near elections), claims by fringe elements, unsupported claims, generalities, over-simplifications, and such, all too often, don’t make sense to me. But maybe the problem has to do with me?
I have had though more than my share of interactions with law enforcement officers. Mostly because I have driven far more miles than most folks, I do in act have over a million miles of what truckers call ‘seat time’. And I have travelled extensively and even in cultures where I was a racial minority. Then too, I am, admittedly, a bit of an outlaw but a harmless one for the most part. So I’ve had to interact with all types of law enforcement officers including a good many who spoke a language that I couldn’t understand. But I learned a long time ago that when a cop pulled me over that I needed to have my ID in hand while keeping my hands in plain view, if in an auto, on the wheel with my ID… signaling cooperation. It follows then that one must be respectful. Accordingly, cops of many racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds, that have often differed from my own, have nearly always been professional with me, and frequently lenient, and this goes for my court experiences as well (I’ve been charged with felonies 6 times, and convicted once but to a lessor charge).
So, are blacks in fact victims of the legal system, or do blacks bring some reactionary behavior on themselves, and, are the typical statistics being used lacking a thorough consideration of key variables such as those mentioned in the article I posted above?
Could it be too that those who benefit from cheap labor simply allow disingenuous voices to be heard too often? Divide and conquer, with an ever increasing percentage of the population gaining from low labor costs. But of course the Democratic party would never allow anything disingenuous that might help them to get more votes. Just like the Republicans would never lie to Bubba.
Ray
Little John, “The BLM manifesto reeks of a post-grad African-American Studies seminar.”
Yes, it’s always a problem when those “darkies” complain about being used for target practice. Shooting at bad guys is so much more dangerous.
So some cops can’t be bothered to differentiate. Maybe they should attend some post-grad high school seminars regarding guilty be reason of skin color.
Ray, Could you have found any more biased source of so called social research than an avowedly Conservative stink tank. And Heather McDonald, an alumnus of that egalitarian breeding ground, the Phillips Academy in Andover, Mass., has authored exclusively hard right wing papers excoriating every complaint about racial bias and concern regarding extreme police and military actions. She has stood tall for the activities made famous at Abu Ghraib and has suggested that torture is not such a bad idea. However, she, like Kimmel in this post, never address the role of poverty and racism in regards to crime and individual failure in general.
Yeah, that’s it. People are being used as target practice. Go back to being perplexed.
Hey Jack,
Mostly because my copying and pasting skills are faster than my typing skills, but also because I’ve already said:
“It isn’t that I have any interest in blaming the victims, but I do find truth very interesting. And quite often, the mainstream views, conventional wisdom, media interpretations of statistics (especially near elections), claims by fringe elements, unsupported claims, generalities, over-simplifications, and such, all too often, don’t make sense to me. But maybe the problem has to do with me? ”
So the point ‘now’ being that I don’t over simplify or generalize to the point that I assume that statistics are good or bad due to the source.
And of course I’m arguing for a reconciliation of the working-class so my intent is far from racially motivated. So… I agree with your contention regarding poverty and racism affecting crime. But, I don’t understand how someone such as you might kept making unsupported claims, and inconsequential arguments, for so long, (assuming that you are the same Jack who has been a regular here for years and years).
The primary example here being that if you are so certain that right-wing-provided statistics are ‘always’ inaccurate, well, explain why and show something better and more convincing. ‘Stand tall’ for your precious POV instead of making one weak argument after another. For example, does it really matter what this woman did about the torturing at Abu Ghraib? What does that have to do with the issue at hand here? History teems with those who have not only supported torture but committed it themselves, but according to your logic…nothing any of them ever said is of any value. In other words, spare me the hyperbolic, beside the point bs, and give me some germane… ‘why’.
Truth?
BS.
Yeah, let’s take statistics from two or three different groups.
Of course in terms of economic status and security; environment; educational opportunities; and the simple truth that these two groups are treated differently in almost every part of their lives have no importance to this truth and will be totally ignored.
If Donald Trump grew up in North Phillly he would not have lived to be 12 years old. And I might be stretching it.
Ray, “So the point ‘now’ being that I don’t over simplify or generalize to the point that I assume that statistics are good or bad due to the source.”
Well you see Ray there is then a serious problem trying to validate the copious quantity of “data” presented by Heather MacDonald in that City-Journal article. Read through that piece of well written, clever would apply, piece of deception. There is not one reference to a quantified data point that can be checked out due to the fact that that author has failed to give any specific reference citations. She cite only general terms for sources such as Bureau of Justice Statistics. She fails to cite where the data is located in that governmental bureau. There web cite doesn’t give data specifics unless one has the precise report to search for the citation. A clever trick of a clever propagandist. If the data Ms MacDonald offers is valid there is no way to assess if that data is in or out of context. She provides lots of statements with numbers that sound like facts, but no means by which a reader can evaluae her use of those facts.
Otherwise Ms MacDonald cites the opinions of many possibly expert people in the criminal justice field, but they are only giving an opinion in those cases with no reference to data to support what is opined. I love that she actually refers to someone’s hypothesis as though that held some special level of validity; “University of Chicago economist Steve Levitt hypothesized in 1996 that had incarceration rates not risen sharply from 1971 to 1993, violent crime would have been 70 percent higher and property crime almost 50 percent higher.” MacDonald’s article goes on and on in this manner. A great many opinions and arguments are referred to without her citation of supportive data. While at the same time she supports her own statements with data which is buried some where within a potential data source, but leaves out a citation specific enough to actually find the source of the data point and in what context it was derived.
“‘For every 1% increase in unemployment in the United States, there was an increased mortality of 37,000 deaths per year (natural and violent) including ~2,000 more suicides and homicides than might otherwise occur.’
“Or explained in simpler terms, for every 1% increase in Unemployment, we can expect to see increases in the mortality rate by 2%, homicides and imprisonments by 6%, and infant mortality by 5%. Since WWII, the unemployment rate for blacks has been twice as high as that of whites.”
On problem with that logic — Black suicide rate is less than half the White suicide rate.
https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/
But the Black poverty rate was 26.2% in 2014, vs. 12.7% for Whites.
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf
(Table 3)
Poverty does not seem to be a driving factor in Black suicide rates.
Similarly, with murder rates six times higher (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/expanded-homicide-data/expanded_homicide_data_table_3_murder_offenders_by_age_sex_and_race_2014.xls) but suicide rates 50% lower, both cannot be the result of the firearm ownership rates.
Warren:
Do not waste my time and the effort to post to me with your baloney. Talk to someone else; but, I am telling you right now do not bother me.
Emichael,
My response to your comment is little different to what I said to Jack. Your argument is soooo weak and pointless. If you are so sure that the statistics, and the analysis thereto, fail to provide ‘truth’, then show something that supports that contention. Why is that so hard for those who ‘seem’ so convinced of their convictions?
As for blacks not being treated differently, how does anything I said or supplied say that. Maybe I suggested such, but not intentionally. I believe that blacks get treated unfairly sometimes, but, blacks receive some preferential treatment too. But that is just it, I strive to avoid generalities and spin-based nonsense. You and Jack however, well, you two make comments such as the one I’m addressing here.
So, if you truly believe that: “let’s take statistics from two or three different groups” is what is needed here, then isn’t “let’s” a contraction of ‘let us’, or is this just yet another inaccurate statement from you. It is after-all you, and Jack, who evidently believe that the info that I provided is biased. But I made my case and here I sit still unconvinced that any of the statistics provided lack ‘truth’. But of course you, nor Jack, have even so much as addressed what you feign to know enough about to dismiss out of hand. But why are we here if not to refine what we think we know? Am I to assume that this is nothing more than a way for you to convince yourself that your opinions are sound simply because they coincide with those of a few other bloggers in obscurity? Or can you back up so many empty claims (“Truth?, “bs”)?
Jack,
So then, if material that one disagrees with is faulty, for whatever reason, and difficult or impossible to verify due to a lack of specific citations…then that makes it impossible to refute any and all premises thereto. Other material of a contrary nature simply will not do, and you are not making pathetic excuses here!
But maybe you are right? So lets explore your contention just a little. Take for example what I think of as a most telling claim for the time we live in:
“Following conviction, blacks were more likely to receive prison sentences, however—an outcome that reflected the gravity of their offenses as well as their criminal records.”
So, let me say first that I think this is especially important because so many citizens believe, right up to the President, that blacks having longer sentences for the same crimes is proof that blacks are treated unfairly. But, does a white man who kills his wife for the insurance money, but who has no criminal record, routinely receive the same punishment as a black man with a long and varied criminal history, and who stalked his victim and then beat him to death with a crow-bar while the victims children stood watching? Or, do outcomes truly reflect “the gravity of their offenses as well as their criminal records.”
So here lies a pertinent question that gets to an important truth. But you argue that without the ability to show where my provided support fails to allow scrutiny, with all of the other sources available, you argue that : ” not one reference to a quantified data point that can be checked out”. But of course you or EMichael, being old hands at this, could simply show superior statistical evidence to the contrary from some other source. But instead, the two of you just keep wasting everyone’s time with empty claims, opinions which you each seem over value, and now, excuses.
So, show me something, anything would be better than more ‘nothing’, and I’m open to the possibility that I need to change my views on this, I truly am in search of truth, now and always. It turns out too, that I’ll be away from my laptop for the rest of the day so you have plenty of time.
I will however give value only where it deserved, but at the very least you should refrain from cherry-picking quotes from the article which I did not use to make my case: ““University of Chicago economist Steve Levitt hypothesized in 1996 that had incarceration rates not risen sharply from 1971 to 1993, violent crime would have been 70 percent higher and property crime almost 50 percent higher.”” What? Was there nothing to attack in that which I provided? Is that your point here? How is this quote germane?
Should you criticize so often when it is in fact your argument that lacks a single ” reference to data to support what is opined”. I don’t want to suggest here that bad data is better than no data, but I provided a plethora of statistics and analysis to work with, and as of yet, not one single statistic to refute any of it, just one weak argument after another. So, maybe the truth is in fact there? Maybe blacks are in fact sentenced fairly.
Frankly Ray I don’t give a damn about what value you may give to any side of an argument. You’re the one who offered up the “straw house” of an argument to make a point. I don’t have the time nor the inclination to take a side in a debate that begins with an argument that has no weight. And in fact it isn’t even your argument. You found an able spin doctor to spin a tale about our criminal justice system that aims at exploring what can be described as only the results of a socioeconomic disaster. You and Heather have accepted the hypothesis that by subjecting an entire racial group, one that is about 20% of the total a population, that smaller group may have some yet smaller component that rejects the ground rules of their subjugation. You’ve both skimmed past the cause of what should be a cause and effect discussion. Otherwise their is no solution to be offered as a correction to a major dysfunction of our society.
No Ray, I don’t play that game where you get to shape the narrative without first proving, or at least substantially supporting, your suppositions. We know that there is crime. We know that there is persistent and abject poverty among the people suffering from the crime. But we only suspect that there are a variety of ways to repair the social fabric. If you can’t even provide concrete support for your, and Heather’s, unstated conclusions, then there is no good argument for you to pursue. All you’re offering is a blame the suffering on those who suffer the most approach. No way Jose for that to stand up to scrutiny. It’s a vacuous explanation to a complex social issue. You need to add substance to your thesis so that it can be put to a serious test of validity and objectivity.
Not worth the argument. This is another Warren.
Jack,
Kudos.
My post would have just been that he is a racist ah.
But then, his climate change opinions have already proven that.
So, your argument to back up all of those previous claims and contentions…essentially consists of:
“I don’t give a damn” – “straw house”- “I don’t have the time”- “nor the inclination”- “to take a side in a debate that begins with an argument that has no weight”(then why criticize my comment in the first place? had you not then already taken a side?). and then: ” it isn’t even your argument”- “You found an able spin doctor to spin a tale”( and I only presented the “spin doctors” excerpts as “interesting”). Then this:”what can be described as only the results of a socioeconomic disaster” (only? ‘unfair sentencing’, a socioeconomic disaster?). and then: “You and Heather”” by subjecting an entire racial group” (so they are ‘all’ murders and criminals now, lol) then: “that smaller group may have some yet smaller component that rejects the ground rules of their subjugation” (what bearing does this have?Do the subjugated often celebrate or even accept their plight?). Then:”You’ve both skimmed past the cause of what should be a cause and effect discussion” (so you respond to my comment and criticize it but I should have anticipated what you ‘now’ consider the issue worth discussing?). Then: “Otherwise their is no solution to be offered as a correction to a major dysfunction of our society”. (but of course the question was whether blacks are treated fairly by the legal system and so you are saying that issue is not worthy of your time). Anyway…now the excuses are getting whinny.
The tone though does take on the even higher pitch of hypocrisy: “No Ray, I don’t play that game where you get to shape the narrative…” (see it? You are saying that it is ok for you to shape the narrative [see last part of previous paragraph] even though it was you who questioned the only pertinent facts yet presented, those being mine.
But of course you can’t dig yourself out of the hole that you foolishly dug. Your problem being that it is impossible to explain away how important the variables truly are where sentencing is concerned. So, bla, bla, bla, and now you only whine and address nearly every related issue except the one in question). (And then you lecture on standards and substance, wow, here in the land of name-calling and regurgitated claims with no support).
But this part:” It’s a vacuous explanation to a complex social issue”, is completely ludicrous and delusional considering all you need are some statistics which show blacks ‘are’ sentenced unfairly. That is if you could possibly find “the time to take a side in a debate that begins with an argument that has no weight” (but I’ll understand if you simply specialize in the causes of great “suffering” and the other nonsense that you equivocated with, hehe).
“…..and the other nonsense that you equivocated with, hehe).” Ray
Do you end all your rants with hehe? I’m guessing that that’s short for tee-hee, a childish giggle with virtually no meaning of its own except to display the immaturity of the person making that comment. You’ve said nothing of importance while doing your best to address the short comings of your own arguments. Sleep it off and try again in the morning.
EMichael,
Once a commenter has resorted to name-calling and unsupportable accusations, I don’t suppose that there is any reason to worry about one’s integrity. Any sense of dignity or honor becomes collateral damage, I suppose.
But you and Jack, being here so much that you evidently have nothing of importance left in your lives, maybe the two of you should consider how your repeated lack of substantive comments reflect on this site.
Angry Bear though, presumably, must seem very important to the likes of you and Jack. It seems to me though, as a casual observer, that the two of you apply a great deal of energy and time… into an effort to drive away anyone who doesn’t agree with your views to the extent that requires your lazy and weak minds to present anything more than declarations and empty claims and so on.
So maybe this lonely site suits the two of you, but I can’t help but wonder what the sponsors must think when they read the comment boards here. I wonder if they understand just how detrimental your kind is to a site such as this one.
Anyway, I do thank you however because I predicted to someone that you would shift to a strategy of name-calling and inaccurate slights, I only wish now that I would have thought to place a bet, thanks though for a good laugh. The “climate change” remark is especially funny.
non sequitur
“So maybe this lonely site suits the two of you, but I can’t help but wonder what the sponsors must think when they read the comment boards here. I wonder if they understand just how detrimental your kind is to a site such as this one.” Ray LaPan-Love
That sounds like a bit of projection on your part Ray. You’ve been spending an increasing amount of time on this poor little “lonely site” lately. Have you nothing better to do with your time. BTW, what’s with the rather unusual nom de plume?
Jack,
‘LaPan’ was the name given to me by my step-father, and that which I used through-out my childhood. But, I was never adopted, so ‘LaPan’ was never my legal name. Then too, I was widely known as Ray LaPan because I qualified for the National Finals Rodeo 3 times (’76,’77,’78), and thus, I was not able to ever fully disassociate myself from my past. Nor was I legally able to get a passport except with my actual name, ‘Love’, and after my relatively short rodeo ‘career’ I decided to travel and learn about the world. This during the Iran/Contra scandal and so…as Ray LaPan Love informally, but formally as Raymond ‘Neil’ Love, I set off for Central America to get some first-hand understanding. And I’m telling you this little detail so that you might better appreciate just how dedicated I am to finding ‘truth’. Prior to spending several months in Central America, I had been living in San Francisco where I got involved in the movement against Reagan’s illegal war. But I couldn’t help but notice that the left-leaning positions relied almost as much on dishonesty as the rightward crowd did. So I set off to learn about the world with a back-pack, and over time it just became impractical to continue as Ray LaPan, although, I still know hundreds of people who know me by that name, so I sign my name ‘Ray LaPan-Love’ in an effort to minimize the confusion.
As for me spending so much time here of late, well, I’m living in a remote part of Nevada, where there is little to do. I do though need to find a site where honest debate is preferred. Maybe then I can learn more about whether blacks receive longer sentences for the same crimes… for good reasons or not. But of course I already knew the answer to that question before posting here yesterday.
RLP,
You post “facts” that squarely compare apples to oranges, then say that since they are both fruits there is relevance to those “facts”.
It’s why I mentioned climate change. It is a typical denier strategy(we had one here for a long time but the last couple of years seems to have taken the starch out of him). He used cherries for his “facts”.
Well,
At least you can’t say she is inconsistent:
“You heard it here first: Heather Mac Donald’s most recent study from the Manhattan Institute reveals the good (and groundbreaking) news that police kill fewer black people than violent criminals. Mac Donald, as you might recall, was a proponent of the theory that murders were on the rise because of the “Ferguson effect”—that dissatisfaction with the police explained a rise in killings, a claim that wasn’t credible at the time and which has been debunked here. You might be sensing a theme—that statistical analysis isn’t Mac Donald’s strong suit—but this hasn’t deterred her from the important work of continuing to tell people that police violence against black people is no big deal.
Where to start? How about the title: most people are killed by violent criminals because violent criminals are, by definition in the Uniform Crime Reports, those who do violent things. Police aren’t included in these figures because “The [UCR] program classifies justifiable homicides”—including those by police officers—“separately.” Now you know: most people who are intentionally killed are intentionally killed by murderers. (Note to the HR Department at the Manhattan Institute: if you are looking for another groundbreaking study, I can tell you right now that most people are raped by rapists, not by police, and would be happy to write that up for a fee.)
She states, “It is other black civilians, not the police, who overwhelmingly perpetrate violence in poor, minority communities.” True. Most people are not killed by police because most people are not police (only about 618,000 patrol officers in a country of more than 300 million). Most people are also not killed by dentists, or Duke graduates, or people named Carl, either, because most people aren’t dentists, Duke graduates, or named Carl. That proves nothing about their moral turpitude or their relative homicidal tendencies. You always bet the field. If, alternatively, there were more homicides from police than non-police (last year that would have meant 13, 472 homicides plus one), then that would mean every year about one in 50 beat officers would kill someone. (These are, in deference to MacDonald, figures based on the killing of all people, not just black people.)
So this latest report is a case of “Duh” (Or, if you prefer, “No duh,” since “duh” is one of those few words whose antonym is actually a synonym). Is this the discussion MacDonald thinks is newsworthy and worth having? Does she think it’s controversial that police kill fewer people than violent criminals? I sure as heck hope that law enforcement kills less often than lawless citizens. What next—is she going to tell us that most police are not thieves? ”
http://www.samefacts.com/2016/01/crime-incarceration/good-news-from-the-manhattan-institute-police-kill-fewer-black-people-than-violent-criminals/
EMichael,
If my facts are so wrong, why not show some that are ‘not’ wrong on the subject in question? Show something that explains how blacks serve longer sentences for the same crimes for reasons other than their criminal histories and the nature of their crimes.
The excuses have become pathetically evasive and quite revealing of your character. Which is then disparaged further by making accusations based on stereotyping driven by, presumably now, a sick need to criticize using whatever serves your agenda, and with no compunctions whatsoever. I said early on that my opinion is based on a firm belief that the ‘divide and conquer’ strategy used by the “string-pullers” is at work here. So, how does anyone other than a lazy or delusional person come up with “racist”. And I’ve worked for the ‘Sierra Club’ for minimum wages, and as volunteered as an activist, so your ‘denier’ accusation says much more about you than it does me. Especially considering that some of here see a pattern that you just can’t stop adding to.
Run,
I suppose it is safe to assume that you didn’t appreciate my mentioning the other day that you need to catch up. There is nothing seriously wrong though with clinging to ones’ glory days just so long as one doesn’t repeat things too much, too often. The degree to which depends somewhat on just how much might be gleaned from the glory, of course.
Memory, naturally, an integral factor as well, do you remember the news article from the Chandler paper that you sent me which included a comment of mine on Joe Arpaio? Probably not, it has been a few years, I still appreciate the gesture however. Quite frankly though, your comments read like old news.
I did not say you were a denier. Read it again.
Her numbers are based on comparing apples to oranges. I’m thinking there is going to be a huge difference in the criminal history of people born in Compton and people born in Beverley Hills. I see no reason to try and make that into a “fact”.
It is a complicated subject, and she is not helping with these numbers, no matter how hard she has worked to make them accurate(or seem accurate).
If you can explain this, than you can probably explain the entire system:
“Staggering Racial Bias: Marijuana use is roughly equal among Blacks and whites, yet Blacks are 3.73 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession.”
https://www.aclu.org/report/report-war-marijuana-black-and-white?redirect=report/war-marijuana-black-and-white
“If my facts are so wrong, why not show some that are ‘not’ wrong on the subject in question? Show something that explains how blacks serve longer sentences for the same crimes for reasons other than their criminal histories and the nature of their crimes.” Ray
Consider carefully what you are asking in that statement. Your hypothesis is that blacks who commit crimes are convicted more frequently and sentenced more severely because of their criminal records and the heinous character of their crimes. But all you have done is to provide data describing the effect of some yet unproven causal element. You have not rejected the null hypothesis, blacks are convicted and sentenced based on characteristics having to do with racial bias, inadequate legal representation, socioeconomic conditions,
or other yet
Sorry, but that comment was prematurely posted.
….or other yet unknown factors. You don’t prove a cause and effect relationship by simply stating and elaborating on the resulting behavior or phenomenon. Neither you nor Heather have proven anything other than that there is crime in impoverished areas, and that could be demonstrated with data related to both white and black crime.
It is not my role, or that of either EMichael or Run, to disprove your assumptions about cause and effect aspects of crime, nor the short comings of the criminal justice system. U.S. Justice Dept. and the FBI publish a great many papers having to do with such issues. Read those before you start filling the blog with crap from the conservative stink tank and faux news industries. There analysts, and that’s a kind word for what they practice, start out with a conclusion and research the best data points, generally totally out of context, in order to prove their ideologies rather than their hypothesis. If that’s new to you I’m sorry for your ignorance. If you have so much available time I’d suggest that you go beyond your current preferred sources and read more widely. Here are some examples of alternative narratives in a discussion of a complex social issue.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-findings-investigation-baltimore-police-department;
https://www.aclu.org/;
https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/news/2170-new-study-by-professor-david-s-abrams-confirms#.V69spjUpX_k;
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&article_id=2499&issue_id=102011
We should have blind justice. Neither the judge nor the jurors should see the accused, know his name, or even know that he is a he.
Prosecutors should not be allowed to offer plea deals, and they should have no more money for prosecuting than the defense has.
It is entirely obvious that it is impossible to know if blacks are treated fairly or not without considering the key variables. The very germane variables which determine the severity of each and every sentence. The point to take from that ‘truth’ then being one of critical importance to know if blacks are being sentenced fairly or not. The relevance then extends to my original lead: “Our president has repeatedly made claims regarding the unfair treatment of blacks by our criminal justice system”, and that is clearly a disingenuous statement if supported by the statistical evidence derived from comparing prison sentences of blacks and whites, two groups which routinely have very different variables. But that is of course the basis for the President’s claim. I’ve heard him say so many times.
So the question follows then, (in a reasonable conversation), why would our President risk inciting more violence when blacks and the law enforcement elements are already so much at odds? That question then hinting at the possibility that the Democrats, like Trump when he incites the working-class whites, is doing what they deem as necessary to get blacks inspired to vote. Ironically then, an interesting conversation is made ready about how important of a role each political party is playing to reinforce the status quo, which, as I mentioned more than once, could not exist without the division in the working-class along racial lines.
So, another question follows, is the President more concerned about the plight of blacks, or, the plight of the Democratic Party. Because it seems very likely that the most important thing he could do at this point, is to focus on that which might lead to unity of the working-class. But, I’ve never so much as heard him say much of anything to further any sort of reconciliation between the 2 ‘blocs’ that, coincidently or ‘not’, when kept from uniting, enable the status quo in both the political and economic sense.
Ray,
That last comment of yours ha the sense of an interesting meandering free wheeling thought that twists and turns and comes to rest on a conclusion with no apparent connection to the thought trip taken to reach that end. A bit of nonsense. The best thing about that comment is that it leaves nothing to reply to and, thereby, it leads to an ending of the thread. I think that will satisfy Run though EMichael may be chagrined at your not having made any sense through most of this ideational journey. I only wondedr what it is that you think you have accomplished playing this game.
Jack,
Yes, my last comment could have used a little more work but we had a delivery of hay, and so, I hit post when I probably should have minimized so as to allow for editing later on.
I was too… trying to summarize, as you suggest, and lead to a conclusion which included something about how badly this site has eroded into something ugly and pointless insofar as the commenting is concerned. I remember back when we had some useful and interesting discussions here… back when the Obamacare discussions ruled the day, and before. Not to suggest that things didn’t get heated, they of course did, but now I find myself wondering if I’m corresponding with those who have been institutionalized for one reason or another. My mind could not avoid wandering into imagined scenes of facilities with angry old men blogging. Presumably, angry because their families no longer have time for them, or maybe because they are being held against their will? In any case, I don’t remember ever having thoughts such as these except on some sites where I could only assume that the bloggers were juveniles, and Emichael reminded me of these types of conversations. Such thoughts do become a distraction though, and I am incessantly questioning whether I am wasting my time here.
So, yes, my last comment was the beginning of an effort to wrap up what became tiresome yesterday. And I can not foresee any reason for commenting here any further, now… or in the future.
Jack,
Very nice.
“And I can not foresee any reason for commenting here any further, now… or in the future.” Ray
I can only say what my mother was often fond of wishing for. From your lips to god’s ear. Especially that part about the future.
I assume somebody else has already commented on the data that shows white-on-white crime is actually just a wee-bit greater than black-on-black crime and the wee-bit difference may be more due to statistical measurement error than anything else.
So what-ever the solution to white-on-white crime, then ought to apply as well to black-on-black crime. Seems like no solutions are being implemented in either case though…. gee, why would that be I wonder?
Somebody commented already that the data ought to be parsed according to income levels… which might be a good starting point to determine whether black-on-black crime differs from white-on-white crime rates due to economic factors* alone.
*economic factors also represent some aspects of self respect. The lower ones own self-respect or self-esteem the less regard they have for anybody else as well. Aretha Franklin’s version of R-E-S-P-E-C-T comes immediately to mind.
Longtooth,
1. I suspect you are wrong about the percentages, at least when it comes to murders. See the last two lines in the final table here. It is hard to make the numbers work if the White on White rate > Black on Black rate.
2. The reason White-on-White crime is less concerning to many people than Black-on-Black crime is that the likelihood of getting killed (and killing) is so much higher in the latter than in the former. Among known murder offenders, Whites and Blacks make up about the same percentage, but there are a lot more Whites than Blacks. You will be hard pressed to find a neighborhood where a person is as likely to get killed as in the South Side of Chicago, or East St. Louis, or Baltimore. That makes reducing the Black on Black murder rate more urgent. I would argue that failing to care about the issue – care enough to look at actual data rather than feelings – is the real disrespect given the high stakes.