Conservative values/principles

[Watermelon]

Why are liberals so obsessed with skin color and gender?

I think it’s fair to point it out here. The legislative body should ideally represent the diversity of the population.

[JimL]

Why are liberals so obsessed with skin color and gender?

Probably because women and people of color wish to have representation in government other than white men many of whom seem to be misogynists and racists which explains why they have so little such representation in the republican party.

[Mountain Man]

Probably because women and people of color wish to have representation in government other than white men many of whom seem to be misogynists and racists which explains why they have so little such representation in the republican party.

I suppose you realize this just affirms your obsession and doesn't actually answer my question.

[Mountain Man]

I think it’s fair to point it out here. The legislative body should ideally represent the diversity of the population.

This assumes that people of color don't vote for white representatives, and that white representatives are incapable of promoting the interests of minority groups.

I can't see how either assumption is not disgustingly racist.

[Whateverman]

Why are liberals so obsessed with skin color and gender?

It probably has something to do with conservatives having a history of obsessively repressing people according to skin color and gender.

[seer]

It probably has something to do with conservatives having a history of obsessively repressing people according to skin color and gender.

Why are you lying, as a conservative I want the law applied equally to all.

[Mountain Man]

It probably has something to do with conservatives having a history of obsessively repressing people according to skin color and gender.

Not so much. Go read up on the history of the KKK and black oppression in the US and tell me which political party was most responsible. Oh, and don't me give me that "Yesterday's Democrats are today's Republicans" canard.

[carpedm9587]

If I say that statistically whites are more violent than Asians or Native Americans is that racist? How so?

Yes, it is, for reasons already enumerated. See my previous answers.

If you don't control for all past criminal history then the conclusions are flawed.

Read it again.

OK, where is your study on black officers compared to white officers?

Sorry, Seer - if I didn't link it in the original post, I have no idea where it is.

And the sentencing conclusion is flawed UNTIL you control for ALL past criminal history which your link did not, no control for non-violent criminal history. https://www.manhattan-institute.org/...cism-1479.html

Read it again.

Philly is pretty representative of large American cities.

One city is still one city, like one glacier is one glacier. No city is "representative of all cities." That is a logical error. If you are going to make a statistical claim about the U.S., your data has to be broader than one city in the U.S. Otherwise, you are merely cherry-picking your data.

But you won't even entertain an opposing view. You are closed minded Carp.

Your opinion is duly noted.

Yes now not only am I a racist, I'm deceptive. Nice to live in your own little bubble.

Yes, Seer - you do tend to be deceptive. Like MM you selectively choose data to support your worldview. Despite your accusations about me, I have actually acknowledged error several times here, and reversed myself more than once when shown information supporting an opposing view. I have NEVER seen you do so, regardless what information is provided. Instead, you dig in, cherry-pick data, ignore points made when you cannot respond to them, and general conduct a discussion in much the same way as Pix and MM. It's why I am increasingly finding it pointless to have discussions with you.

The closed mind is not on this side of the Internet connection, Seer. I think you need to look a tad closer to home.

[carpedm9587]

It's getting better, still a way to go though.

Agreed

[carpedm9587]

Well, yes, that's why I asked, because you mentioned deliberately exposing your kiddos to "black cultural heritage", so I was curious what exactly that looked like from your point of view.

Hopefully, you have your answer.

[carpedm9587]

The biggest scientific study I'm aware of found that the answer was both, but a lot more #1 than #2.

What the data say about police brutality and racial bias gives this graph, which is informative:



What that tells you is that for incidents in white neighborhoods (left side of the graph), black and white officers had a similar chance of deciding to use a gun during the incident. (i.e. black cops aren't racist toward whites and don't use guns on them any more than white cops do)

But in a black neighborhood, it's a whole other story. When a black officer was dispatched to deal with a situation, their chances of using a gun in an incident in a black neighborhood were ~50% higher than in a white neighborhood. That shouldn't be surprising, as it reflects more violent crimes occurring there.

But the statistic that really stands out (top right of the graph) is that white officers were ~800% more likely to use their gun in a black neighborhood than in a white one. The white officers, unlike the black officers, are really, really, trigger-happy in black areas.

That seems to be racism: The behavior of the white cops with regard to use of a gun is really really different to the black cops, and that behavioral difference just so happens to manifest in black neighborhoods. That behavior is how a racist person would act.

So with regard to your two explanations of police use of force in black neighborhoods of (1) racism, and (2) more crime, then, assuming we are talking about white officers, it appears from the data that it's about 75% due to apparent racism and 25% due to more serious crime in those areas.

THAT's IT! That was the article I was reading.

[carpedm9587]

Worth looking at the demographics of who the newly-elected members were in each party in hat 116th Congress. It tells a clear story as to which party represents a single race (and mostly a single sex) and which party represents in a balanced way the demographics of America:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]46846[/ATTACH]

The Republicans appear to be the party of a single race and a single sex. Worth reflecting on the fact that the stats you cite are only reasonably close to that of the overall US population because there was a blue wave in 2018, so Dems were able to elect such a well-balanced field that reflected the wider US population.

I'd be curious to run the numbers, but I suspect that Democrats HAVE achieved diversity close to proportionate with the U.S. population. The reason why Congress as a whole has not is because "diversity" is a dirty word to many Republicans. For many of them, the continued argument is "we elect people on merit - not skin color." Amazingly, white older men continually have more merit than pretty much any other demographic.

[carpedm9587]

It's unquestionably nuanced. White cops are more cautious because they undoubtedly have more aggressive encounters with blacks than black cops do. Not just in how blacks view cops in general, but especially how they view whites in general. Blacks, particularly in the hood, are deeply racist against whites primarily because of democratic leaders (especially and particularly Nation of Islam leaders like Farrakhan) drumming into their heads that "whitey" is keeping them down and a major part of their struggles. Liberals love to deny the racist views on the part of blacks against whites, but this is a stone cold reality that no one living in the hood can deny. This also shows in the black on white violent crime data. I have no doubt this is a factor that affects the data SL referenced.

The racism implicit in this answer is simply mind-boggling. In a country where income for black people averages below white people across all age groups, overall health and healthcare availability for black people is documented to be below white people across all age groups, education level of black people is documented to be below white people across all age groups, criminal penalties for black people are harsher than white people across all age groups, arrests for black people are at a higher level than white people for the same crimes across all age groups, and the list goes on....the REAL problem is that black people are racist against white people. And all of this in a country in which white people enslaved black people for over 250 years, then continued to impose Jim Crow laws on them for the next nearly 100 years, and even today continues to adopt policies that have a significantly more negative impact on black people than white people, largely because of the disadvantage the average black person begins life with - all the while so many white people (and even some black people) bury their head in the sand and pretend systemic racism (and sexism) no longer exists?

It simply boggles the imagination.

[carpedm9587]

Why are liberals so obsessed with skin color and gender?

When a group is systemically oppressed and disadvantaged, it is not possible to call attention to it without identifying the commonality. In this case, that is skin color and gender.

If blond people were being systematically oppressed or disadvantaged, we'd be talking about hair color.
When Jewish people are being systematically oppressed or disadvantaged, we talk about religion/nationality.
If short people were being systematically oppressed or disadvantaged, we'd be talking about height.
If hirsute people were being systematically oppressed or disadvantaged, we'd be talking about hair.

This is an extremely disingenuous question designed to reverse the narrative by calling those who are calling for justice "racist" because they have to refer to race to point out the injustice.

[seer]

Yes, it is, for reasons already enumerated. See my previous answers.

No it isn't, it would be a fact. Since 13% of the population commits 50% of the murders and 48% of the robberies that segment is committing these violent crimes way out of portion to their population size. If we are not to see that as being more violent what are we to see it as?