Pope says anti-maskers stuck in ‘their own little world of interests’

[metis]

Exactly. Media covers stories that are sensational. A peaceful protest isn't terribly interesting.

Exactly.

Here in the Detroit area we had some protests with BLM being in the forefront, but they were non-violent. They made the local t.v. news affiliates on ABC and NBC but not the national news on either.

 

[Left Coast]

Exactly.

Here in the Detroit area we had some protests with BLM being in the forefront, but they were non-violent. They made the local t.v. news affiliates on ABC and NBC but not the national news on either.

DETROIT?!?!?!?!!

From what I keep hearing, you guys are a bunch of amoral reprobate animals up there!

 

[metis]

DETROIT?!?!?!?!!

From what I keep hearing, you guys are a bunch of amoral reprobate animals up there!

But we take pride in that! And having animal sex is great! At least as far as I can remember.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Incorrect.

Wow. You really showed me. Good job.

Incorrect. They're talking about the disproportionate way that black people are incarcerated, particularly when it comes to drug related crimes (despite using drugs at the same or lower rates as white folks).

You can interpret it that way if you want - but I think, "We demand an end to the criminalization, incarceration, and killing of our people" to be crystal clear.

And I understand that uninformed folks like to cry "Racism!" whenever they see a disparity of outcome between the races - but there are a myriad of facts that can account for them.

For example, the fact that judges tend to be more lenient toward defendants who have dependents or who have gone to college. I'm not saying that this is right - but it's not racist.

And before you cry racism about dependents and college - no one is making black men abandon their children or not graduate high school at much higher rates than white men.

Their community has been the target of systemic discrimination - based solely on their race. Thus they seek to remedy that.

No one is denying that black people were not the target of systemic discrimination in the past. The "in the past" being the key part of that sentence.

And - unfortunately for the human race - we cannot remedy the past. Any attempt made by us to "correct history" will cause unfair treatment toward someone today.

Not to mention that whole idea of correcting history being a slippery slope. How far back would we go? And for who? Until my ancestors were kidnapped in Europe and thrown on ships and sent to the "New World" to colonize and work against their will?

Or to back when my ancestors were owned by the ancestors of those demanding reparations today?

Black people have been systemically prevented from the procurement of property and assets, based solely on their race. They seek to remedy that through community investment in predominantly black neighborhoods (ask yourself why, historically, do we have black neighborhoods?).

They were denied many things because of their race in the past. And today they are demanding things because of their race.

You'd think we would learn from the mistakes of the past - but no. Let's keep dividing ourselves based on race.

All communities should have collective ownership if that's what they want. This goal just specifies the desire for that by black people.

No - that's the desire of Black Lives Matter. Not black people. They don't speak for an entire demographic.

Don't act like black people have a "collective mind". BLM was made by a bunch of bored middle-age white Karens.

So - what if members of the particular community don't want socialism?

That is not what it says at all. What iy's advocating is simply democratic self-determination in the composition and operation of their government. That should be the case everywhere, for all people. You're against people having the right to determine the makeup of their own government? You're American, aren't you?

That's why we have elections. They have every right to vote their representative in or to run for office themselves. But if they don't win - they will cry "Racism!" - won't they?

Besides - what they demand is purely subjective. "We demand a world where those most impacted in our communities control the laws, institutions, and policies that are meant to serve us"

Who are "those most impacted" in their communities? Are they talking about only the black people?

So only black people could "control the laws, institutions, and policies" of their communities?

They're not ignoring the mistakes of the past - they are copying and pasting pages from history!

Gasp!

A nice rule of thumb when talking about race - replace the word "black" with "white". If it sounds racist to you then - then it's racist.

Would you consider someone advocating for "independent White political power" to be racist?

No. What they want is for this country to be changed to reflect their interests and values. Which all people want.

Then they should drop the terrorism and vote in the representative they want or run for officer themselves. Just like everyone else.

I think the reason they don't focus on that is because they know that the majority of America doesn't want their neo-Marxist BS.

Again, what kind of person would be against such an obviously just idea?

An informed patriot who believes in the rule of law.

 

[Left Coast]

You can interpret it that way if you want - but I think, "We demand an end to the criminalization, incarceration, and killing of our people" to be crystal clear.

And if you read no further than a simple infographic - yeah, you'll take them hyper-literally. If you actually understand the issues at play, however, you'll gain a slightly more nuanced perspective.

For example, the fact that judges tend to be more lenient toward defendants who have dependents or who have gone to college. I'm not saying that this is right - but it's not racist.

It is systemically racist, because there is racial disparity in who goes to college. Actually, there is racial disparity in education all the way down to who goes to preschool.

And before you cry racism about dependents and college - no one is making black men abandon their children or not graduate high school at much higher rates than white men.

Black men "abandoning their children" is a myth. Impoverished communities have worse educational outcomes than rich ones. And black communities are poorer than white ones. That's been the case for all of American history. Black median income has never equaled or exceeded white income. Think hard about why, historically, that might be.

No one is denying that black people were not the target of systemic discrimination in the past. The "in the past" being the key part of that sentence.

It remains the case today, on a myriad of outcomes. Repeated studies have shown that black job applicants are less likely to be hired than white ones, even when they have identical resumes. Black people are more likely to be pulled over when driving. More likely to be killed by police. More likely to be incarcerated for drug related crimes, even though they use no more frequently than white people. They get longer prison sentences for the same crimes. They are more likely to get the death penalty. And on. And on. And on. To pretend that all these outcomes are just a function of what Black people deserve, is to be in complete denial. Or to be racist.

Not to mention that whole idea of correcting history being a slippery slope. How far back would we go? And for who? Until my ancestors were kidnapped in Europe and thrown on ships and sent to the "New World" to colonize and work against their will?

Or to back when my ancestors were owned by the ancestors of those demanding reparations today?

Systemic racism is happening right now today. There's no need to go back centuries in the past. Official, legal, segregation just ended in the mid 20th century...many Black people alive today were alive when that was still the case.

No - that's the desire of Black Lives Matter. Not black people. They don't speak for an entire demographic.

Don't act like black people have a "collective mind".

Again, you're being pretty hyper-literal here. They don't claim to speak for every Black person on earth.

BLM was made by a bunch of bored middle-age white Karens.

Incorrect, it was started by three black women.

So - what if members of the particular community don't want socialism?

All communities should have democratic self-determination to the greatest degree possible, in my view.

That's why we have elections. They have every right to vote their representative in or to run for office themselves. But if they don't win - they will cry "Racism!" - won't they?

Yes, thank you for informing me we have elections. BLM and I are quite aware of that. We vote.

Besides - what they demand is purely subjective. "We demand a world where those most impacted in our communities control the laws, institutions, and policies that are meant to serve us"

Who are "those most impacted" in their communities? Are they talking about only the black people?

Black people are those most impacted, disproportionately. They're talking about community representation, bottom-up policy-making rather than top-down. Why should the communities that policies affect not have a say in what the policies are? That's basic democracy.

So only black people could "control the laws, institutions, and policies" of their communities?

In black communities, yes, obviously black people should have control over their own government. All communities should have control over their own government. This is profoundly basic. Why would you possibly be against such a thing? You don't want communities to have control over how they are governed?

A nice rule of thumb when talking about race - replace the word "black" with "white". If it sounds racist to you then - then it's racist.

That is a terrible, ridiculous rule of thumb that ignores all of the history that got us to where we are. That kind of color-blindness erases the facts on the ground that separate white and black people to this day.

Then they should drop the terrorism and vote in the representative they want or run for officer themselves. Just like everyone else.

They're not terrorists. They do vote. They're political activists - what do you think they're trying to get people to do? Change their minds and vote to make the system more just.

This is getting quite far afield from the Pope and anti-maskers though. Perhaps we call a truce for now and take up the conversation another day/in another thread?