This is bullshit. Is there some epidemic of white-on-black murder, assault, burglary, etc.? No. Not just no, fuck no, there isn't. As Shelby Steele says:
The civil rights community and the liberal media live by the poetic truth that America is still a reflexively racist society, and that this remains the great barrier to black equality. But this "truth" has a lot of lie in it. America has greatly evolved since the 1960s. There are no longer any respectable advocates of racial segregation. And blacks today are nine times more likely to be killed by other blacks than by whites. If Trayvon Martin was a victim of white racism (hard to conceive since the shooter is apparently Hispanic), his murder would be an anomaly, not a commonplace. It would be a bizarre exception to the way so many young black males are murdered today. If there must be a generalization in all this-a call "to turn the moment into a movement"-it would have to be a movement against blacks who kill other blacks. The absurdity of Messrs. Jackson and Sharpton is that they
( ... )
I find it hard to take seriously a source that thinks that a person can't be white because of having a parent from a Hispanic nation. The fact that the US considers there to be some huge gulf between 'White people' and people who have any sort of Hispanic ancestry tends to strike me as very telling about American attitudes towards race.
I'd also note that what the woman in this video is saying is far more profound than just addressing the issue of white people murdering black people. She's talking about how western culture presents black men as threatening. Zimmerman took that message to an extreme but it's not just Zimmerman whose attitudes she'd like to see change.
Wait a sec. Are you seriously saying that Western Culture presents black men as threatening, but the reality is that black men are no more dangerous than, say, Asian men or White men? Is this what you're saying? That the stereotype is not born out by the statistics on violent crime?
Suppose every white person's attitude changed and not a single white person on the planet viewed black males as threatening. How would this even begin to address the real threat to blacks???
While African Americans comprise 13.5% of the U.S. Population, 43% of all murder victims in 2007 were African American, 93.1% of whom were killed by African Americans.
Victimizations of African Americans from violent crime which include the following; rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated and simple Assault was 24.3% in 2007, with the highest percentages of victimizations within the age ranges of 15-24 totaling a percentage greater than 38%.
White attitudes toward blacks are IRRELEVANT for the purposes of keeping blacks alive. That's the point.
"Are you seriously saying that Western Culture presents black men as threatening, but the reality is that black men are no more dangerous than, say, Asian men or White men"
Before I address anything specific, perhaps it's best that we clarify your position explicitly.
Your position is that black men are more dangerous and violent than other men? You also presumably don't find this generalisation at all problematic?
It depends on what we're talking about. In terms of day-to-day violent crime in the United States, black men are orders-of-magnitude more dangerous and violent than other men. This is backed up with every single crime statistic there is.
If we're talking about government-sactioned murder, White and Asian men are clearly more dangerous. 20th Century Asia and Western Europe resulted in hundreds of millions of deaths by governments and their appointed thugs. White men used 2 nuclear weapons on civilian populations. And so on. As nasty as Africa has been with tribal warfare and warlordism, they're amateurs when it comes to mass-slaughter.
I find everything I just said to be non-problematic.
Okay, to circle back to my initial statement that you found questionable.
Do you think that the statistics you just cited are a good basis to perceive black people you might see in the street as threatening and potentially violent?
That's like asking if you think that crime statistics are a good reason to lock the doors of your house or not leave a laptop computer on the seat of your car? Of course we still put locks on our doors and don't leave our valuables in plain view in our cars despite the fact that any one person's risk of being a victim of crime is relatively low
( ... )
You didn't explicitly answer the question but what you seem to be saying is 'yes, it is reasonable to treat black strangers in the street as suspicious because of these statistics'.
However, I don't think your reasoning is sound. I think the problem is reflected in your choice of examples.
For instance, if we're to talk about STD prevention then we need to compare two types of sex that can transmit STDs at different rates. Unprotected anal sex is a number of times more likely to transmit an STD than unprotected vaginal sex; that would be a more relevant statistic. It's also quite revealing.
Clearly, a person should avoid unprotected sex in general in order to avoid STD transmission. However, even though there is a significant differences to be seen in a direct comparison between transmission with anal and vaginal sex, that shouldn't translate into a difference of attitude; you should wear a condom regardless of whether you are engaging in vaginal or anal sex. A person that gets nervous about the fear of STD transmission
( ... )
What you have suggested is not equivalent to locking your doors when you leave your house, It's only equivalent to leaving your house unlocked except when you see a black person in the neighbourhood.
Click to view
The civil rights community and the liberal media live by the poetic truth that America is still a reflexively racist society, and that this remains the great barrier to black equality. But this "truth" has a lot of lie in it. America has greatly evolved since the 1960s. There are no longer any respectable advocates of racial segregation. And blacks today are nine times more likely to be killed by other blacks than by whites. If Trayvon Martin was a victim of white racism (hard to conceive since the shooter is apparently Hispanic), his murder would be an anomaly, not a commonplace. It would be a bizarre exception to the way so many young black males are murdered today. If there must be a generalization in all this-a call "to turn the moment into a movement"-it would have to be a movement against blacks who kill other blacks. The absurdity of Messrs. Jackson and Sharpton is that they ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I'd also note that what the woman in this video is saying is far more profound than just addressing the issue of white people murdering black people. She's talking about how western culture presents black men as threatening. Zimmerman took that message to an extreme but it's not just Zimmerman whose attitudes she'd like to see change.
Reply
Suppose every white person's attitude changed and not a single white person on the planet viewed black males as threatening. How would this even begin to address the real threat to blacks???
While African Americans comprise 13.5% of the U.S. Population, 43% of all murder victims in 2007 were African American, 93.1% of whom were killed by African Americans.
Victimizations of African Americans from violent crime which include the following; rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated and simple Assault was 24.3% in 2007, with the highest percentages of victimizations within the age ranges of 15-24 totaling a percentage greater than 38%.
White attitudes toward blacks are IRRELEVANT for the purposes of keeping blacks alive. That's the point.
Reply
Before I address anything specific, perhaps it's best that we clarify your position explicitly.
Your position is that black men are more dangerous and violent than other men? You also presumably don't find this generalisation at all problematic?
Reply
If we're talking about government-sactioned murder, White and Asian men are clearly more dangerous. 20th Century Asia and Western Europe resulted in hundreds of millions of deaths by governments and their appointed thugs. White men used 2 nuclear weapons on civilian populations. And so on. As nasty as Africa has been with tribal warfare and warlordism, they're amateurs when it comes to mass-slaughter.
I find everything I just said to be non-problematic.
Reply
Do you think that the statistics you just cited are a good basis to perceive black people you might see in the street as threatening and potentially violent?
Reply
Reply
However, I don't think your reasoning is sound. I think the problem is reflected in your choice of examples.
For instance, if we're to talk about STD prevention then we need to compare two types of sex that can transmit STDs at different rates. Unprotected anal sex is a number of times more likely to transmit an STD than unprotected vaginal sex; that would be a more relevant statistic. It's also quite revealing.
Clearly, a person should avoid unprotected sex in general in order to avoid STD transmission. However, even though there is a significant differences to be seen in a direct comparison between transmission with anal and vaginal sex, that shouldn't translate into a difference of attitude; you should wear a condom regardless of whether you are engaging in vaginal or anal sex. A person that gets nervous about the fear of STD transmission ( ... )
Reply
Reply
What you have suggested is not equivalent to locking your doors when you leave your house, It's only equivalent to leaving your house unlocked except when you see a black person in the neighbourhood.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment