Race may account for 6 pts. in election

[David Floyd]

Not the case at all. In the case of loans, blacks can apply for them, and if they have good credit will get them. If blacks want to win political office, they can certainly do so and there are many examples. As for jobs, blacks can apply and no one is going to ask their race on their job application. If blacks think they are discriminated against during their interview, they can and have sued and won.

[ramseya]

I witnessed something interesting today, more so because it took place on a public bus and the allusion it had to the civil rights movement. Two middle aged, blue-collar white guys came on the bus and one sat next to a young Black woman who immediately told him, loud enough for everybody on the bus to hear, "You can't sit here". The other people on the bus (pretty much all Black) looked at her funny and many people said "How can you tell someone they can't sit somewhere on a bus?"

The guy sat there for the rest of the trip, but the woman later got off at her stop and the puzzling situation suddenly became clear as she had a t-shirt (which I couldn't make out the words exactly from my vantage point) which included the words "Black" in big letters, something something "salutes" something something. The fact that she also had a little bit of an afro suddenly made it clear that she was one of those types.

Anyway, the two white guys realized it too (and probably could read the whole t-shirt) and said, "Don't be racist". She then said "I'm not racist" and got off the bus, with no explanation as to her attitude.

I don't know. If Obama loses, will we see retaliation and riots by Black Americans? There's enough crazy Afro-centrics to incite something and enough regular people who will be frustrated that we could see an LA riots sort of thing. What do you think? I pray that won't happen.

[David Floyd]

Oh, I guarantee there will be riots if/when Obama loses, especially if it's a close election.

[ramseya]

Kidicious:

Though the extent of discrimination is debatable, I'll disagree with David Floyd and say that your basic point is correct as to the inequality in opportunity for jobs, houses, loans, etc. However, you must concede that 1) the situation has been dramatically improved and improving and that 2) the alternatives (affirmative action and whatever alternatives are proposed for loan and housing discrepancies; are there any besides suing which can be effective for those who have the time and resources to file a lawsuit?) are hardly great or fair.

What alternatives do you propose?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by ramseya
Kidicious:

Though the extent of discrimination is debatable, I'll disagree with David Floyd and say that your basic point is correct as to the inequality in opportunity for jobs, houses, loans, etc. However, you must concede that 1) the situation has been dramatically improved and improving and that 2) the alternatives (affirmative action and whatever alternatives are proposed for loan and housing discrepancies; are there any besides suing which can be effective for those who have the time and resources to file a lawsuit?) are hardly great or fair.

What alternatives do you propose?

I support AA because it creates a society were miniorities share equally in everything society offers. As far as the human race goes, I think we're all too tribal, and the only person you can change is yourself.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Actually, yes.

What part of institutionalized and systemic did you not understand?

[David Floyd]

What part of "disproportionate to the general population" do you not understand?

[Theben]

Originally posted by David Floyd
So, then, your point is that combating discrimination with discrimination is OK?

Under these circumstances, yes.

Also, there are already plenty of laws out there against racial discrimination in the workplace. Rather than passing new, discriminatory laws, why not just enforce existing laws?

I take it where you live the crime rate is at 0%, right?

Then we're going to go back to, enforce existing laws. As for this happening in the past 10 years, what are some of the reasons that you think it isn't nearly as prevalent now? Perhaps because the law was enforced?

Because I haven't paid attention to it since. While it made national news, chances are similar practices have been missed and/or reborn with different methods.

Again, I've never said there is NO discrimination in this country, no racism in this country - what I've said is that there are checks and balances/laws combating racism and discrimination (that, by the way, were passed by white people), and also that racism and discrimination are far lesser problems now than there were before.

"But remember, white people ENDED slavery, Bobby."

Sorry, but it's becoming harder and harder to take you seriously.

Actually, yes.

A study published in 1993 entitled "Highlights from 20 Years of Surveying Crime Victims" found the following: Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted, or raped by blacks in 1993, as against about 130,000 blacks who had the same crimes committed against them by whites. Thus, even though blacks only comprise about 12% of the population, they committed something like 7.5 times the number of violent crimes against whites, than vice versa.

In 2001, according to FBI statistics http://www.adl.org/Learn/hate_crimes_laws/HCSA_FBI.asp 20% of all crimes designated by hate crimes were committed by blacks, a number which is disproportionate to the black population. In 2003, FBI statistics reported that blacks committed approximately 19% of hate crimes, a statistically insignificant difference from 2001 and again, disproportionate to the black population.

2005 Department of Justice statistics http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm note the following:

Blacks comprise 6 times the number of homicide victims as whites - however, 94% of blacks are killed by blacks, as against only 86% of whites killed by whites. That seems quite disproportionate, especially when you add in the statistic that blacks were, in 2005, 7 times as likely to be homicide offenders as whites.

I could keep going, and point out that the odds of me surviving a walk alone through Harlem at 1:00am without being the victim of some kind of crime are probably pretty remote, but I'll consider my point made for the moment.

You made some point I imagine, but you failed to answer my question.
Again, can you point out where any black on white violence or racism was systemic and/or institutionalized?

I mean, do you really think that the number 1 out of 3 only exists because of racism? Now that's naive.

There's a difference between *partially* and *only*. I didn't say that because I didn't think I needed to spell it out.

[David Floyd]

Under these circumstances, yes.

So you admit that Affirmitive Action is racial discrimination?

I take it where you live the crime rate is at 0%, right?

No, but it's common sense that if laws are being broken, rather than passing new laws, you try enforcing the existing ones first.

Because I haven't paid attention to it since. While it made national news, chances are similar practices have been missed and/or reborn with different methods.

Well, when you start paying attention again, come talk to me. Yes, I'm sure that people who are determined to be racist can find a way, but that doesn't mean that racism is institutionalized.

Sorry, but it's becoming harder and harder to take you seriously.

This, in response to my statement that over the years, racism and discrimination have become less of a problem in the US? Really? Are you saying that racism and discrimination have not been lessening as time goes by?

Again, can you point out where any black on white violence or racism was systemic and/or institutionalized?

I don't know why you are fixated on the phrase "systemic and/or institutionalized". After all, an isolated dragging death doesn't mean that white on black violent crime is systemic and institutionalized. Rather than focus on that, I simply focused on objective, verifiable crime statistics, which in fact DID show that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of black on white violence, whereas white on black violence is disproportionate in the OTHER direction (translation, blacks commit more, whites commit less). What more do you want? Sources other than the FBI and DOJ?

There's a difference between *partially* and *only*. I didn't say that because I didn't think I needed to spell it out.

No, I think you do need to spell it out. Let's see, there are around 40 million blacks in the US today. Stipulating your statistic, that 1/3 will spend time in jail or prison, that translates to around 13 million. To move that number down by 10% to adjust for racism, you'd have to be asserting that 1.3 million blacks will end up in jail or prison, not because they committed crimes, but because of our "racist" court system.

Now, if you want to tell me that 50,000 or 100,000 will end up in jail because of racism, I can maybe, MAYBE buy that. And don't get me wrong, any number above 0 is still unacceptable, but even if you subtract 100,000 from 13 million, blacks are still committing a hugely disproportionate amount of offenses that result in jail time. Why is that?

On the other hand, I just pulled those numbers out of my ass to make a point. It's your argument - find real statistics to back up your point that a statistically significant number of blacks end up in jail due to racism.