How do you end 'cancel culture'?

African-Americans do indeed still get less thrift than they deserve, after all these years, in the United States. But institutionally, universally, and nationwide dehumanized? Do you or her even understand what that means? I will tell you. Jews, Romani, Homosexuals, Communists, Socialists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Quakers in Nazi Germany, Homosexuals in Chechnya, the Tunjur and Fur Peoples of Darfur, Non-Moslems in Iran and Saudi Arabia, Karens, Kachins, Rakhine, and Shan Peoples in Myanmar, political dissidents in the PRC, and other examples such as that. Do African-Americans in the Modern United States come close to THAT level of injustice and suffering? This is why I called Cloud_Strife's post an exaggeration and out-of-proportion and DIDN'T actually say it had no grain of truth. The thing is, though, and another part of my point, that such overplayed hyperbole is not helpful, and only harmful, in the long run, to such activism.

“Listen we’re gonna keep killing you, defunding your schools, refuse to maintain your infrastructure, segregate you with redlining, incarcerate you by the millions so 1/6 of you will do forced labor for the state and its private partners in your lifetime, and systematically convict you for victimless petty crimes at higher rates than anyone else, BUT I never said you weren’t a human.”
 
You know, instead of attacking other posters. Maybe you should give examples :huh:. Since I’m gonna take it as that you don’t have any examples to give.

It has to be satire, right?
 
“Listen we’re gonna keep killing you, defunding your schools, refuse to maintain your infrastructure, segregate you with redlining, incarcerate you by the millions so 1/6 of you will do forced labor for the state and its private partners in your lifetime, and systematically convict you for victimless petty crimes at higher rates than anyone else, BUT I never said you weren’t a human.”

I have not made, nor supported -nor done anything but excoriate and call out the politicians and institutions behind - the policies above (except for the last one). The fact that I ALSO call out the ruinous, chaotic, destructive, short-sighted, and engaging in tactics reminiscent in style of certain ones by historical extremist analogs to their opponents' rhetoric, platforms, and activism of the more radical 2010's American Social Progressive movement, and refuse to side firmly, staunchly, undissentingly, unquestioningly, and solidly with one extreme or the other - especially as defined by the specially American paradigm of socio-political labels, platforms, most prominent issues, and factions (when I am not an American) DOES NOT make me evil or apathetic or without my own beliefs and views on how things can be changed for the better or a "closet Alt-Right member by default," or any other such braindead, zombie-mob-thinking crap. Quit your damned McCarthyist witch-hunting. I am sick of having to deal with it. It's utter idiocy, and shuts out all rational, logical thinking and facts for sheer hivemind groupthink.
 
It has to be satire, right?

And I'm still awaiting the answer as to which compromised, unflattering, and completing undermining your credibility states of mind you were in where seriously misquoted me upthread.
 
It has to be satire, right?
I’m convinced that Patine doesn’t want to engage in any constructive discussion and resorts to throwing a tantrum. Cloud asked him politely to give examples, twice.
 
I’m convinced that Patine doesn’t want to engage in any constructive discussion and resorts to throwing a tantrum. Cloud asked him politely to give examples, twice.

One cannot, by nature, engage in constructive discussion with unbendingly mindless dogmatic Neo-Manichaean witch-hunters ready to pounce on any phrase that can be turned or twisted disingenuously against it's intent or to even outright put words and intents into others mouths that are completely absent.

Moderator Action: Patine, settle down and stop name calling. --LM
 
Last edited by a moderator:
“Listen we’re gonna keep killing you, defunding your schools, refuse to maintain your infrastructure, segregate you with redlining, incarcerate you by the millions so 1/6 of you will do forced labor for the state and its private partners in your lifetime, and systematically convict you for victimless petty crimes at higher rates than anyone else, BUT I never said you weren’t a human.”

This piece has some useful data that attempts to dismiss the crime argument:

High Incarceration Rate Of Blacks Is Function Of Crime, Not Racism

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 media love to target the federal crack penalties because crack defendants are likely to be black. In 2006, 81% of federal crack defendants were black while only 27% of federal powder-cocaine defendants were.

Since federal crack rules are more severe than those for powder, and crack offenders are disproportionately black, those rules must explain why so many blacks are in prison, the conventional wisdom holds.

But consider that in 2006, only 5,619 crack sellers were tried federally, 4,495 of them black. It’s going to take a lot more than 5,000 or so crack defendants a year to account for the 562,000 black prisoners in state and federal facilities at the end of 2006 — or the 858,000 black prisoners in custody overall, if one includes the population of county and city jails.

Moreover, the press almost never mentions the federal methamphetamine-trafficking penalties, which are identical to those for crack. In 2006, the 5,391 sentenced federal meth defendants were 54% white, 39% Hispanic and 2% black. No one calls the federal meth laws anti-Hispanic or anti-white.

The press has also served up a massive dose of crack revisionism aimed at proving the racist origins of the war on crack. Crack was never a big deal, the revisionist story line goes. The belief that crack was an inner-city scourge was a racist illusion.

The assertion that concern about crack was motivated by racism ignores a key fact: Black leaders were the first to sound the alarm about the drug, as Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy documents in “Race, Crime, and the Law.” These politicians were reacting to a devastating outbreak of inner-city violence and addiction unleashed by the new form of cocaine.

Critics follow up their charges about crack with several false claims about drugs and imprisonment.

The first is that drug enforcement has been the most important cause of the overall rising incarceration rate since the 1980s. Not true.

Violent crime has always been the leading driver of prison growth, especially since the 1990s. In state prisons, where 88% of the nation’s inmates are housed, violent and property offenders make up over 3 1/2 times the number of state drug offenders.

Next, critics blame drug enforcement for rising racial disparities in prison. Again, the facts say otherwise. In 2006, blacks were 37.5% of the 1,274,600 state prisoners. If you remove drug prisoners from that population, the percentage of black prisoners drops to 37%

Full source: https://www.manhattan-institute.org...te-blacks-function-crime-not-racism-1479.html
 
You post Literal apologetics for institutional racism and you wonder why people react so badly to you

WTH is the "race industry"?

And why the disparity between crack and powdered cocaine sentencing, of which black people tend to use the former and whites the latter? What other explanation is there beyond institutional racism rearing it's ugly head again?

Moderator Action: Redacted
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You post Literal apologetics for institutional racism and you wonder why people react so badly to you

WTH is the "race industry"?

And why the disparity between crack and powdered cocaine sentencing, of which black people tend to use the former and whites the latter? What other explanation is there beyond institutional racism rearing it's ugly head again?

If people want to react badly to me then that is their choice.

Read the full article.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What does your ten year old commentary article from an investors publication suggest as a solution to the problem?

The articles intention I'd gather, isn't about solutions but addressing common misconceptions about sentencing and the justice system.

However, my suggestions would be deterring people from getting involved in gangs, keeping kids in school by making parents a lot more accountable for why their child is not attending school, being more proactive helping felons find employment after their jail term is completed (something which I went into in another thread), buck the societal trend that drugs, violence and crime are "cool", setting examples would be a good start, and above all that people taking responsibility for THEIR OWN ACTIONS.
 
If you want an example of how that article is misrepresenting information, Modder, take a look at the sleight-of-hand in this claim:

But consider that in 2006, only 5,619 crack sellers were tried federally, 4,495 of them black. It’s going to take a lot more than 5,000 or so crack defendants a year to account for the 562,000 black prisoners in state and federal facilities at the end of 2006

She gives how many people were tried federally for crack charges, but then compares that to the imprisonment rate in state and federal facilities. Since there are about five times as many people in state prisons as in federal prisons, and since 16% of the state imprisonments are for drug-related charges (and a higher percentage back in 2008, when your article was written), you actually can start to account for that 562,000 number through a high imprisonment rate for drug related crimes.

Then take this one:

Violent crime has always been the leading driver of prison growth, especially since the 1990s. In state prisons, where 88% of the nation’s inmates are housed, violent and property offenders make up over 3 1/2 times the number of state drug offenders.

It may be that "violent and property offenders make up 3 1/2 times the number of state drug offenders" and that drug offenses could still be the leading driver of prison growth. Let's say that the number of violent and property offenses stayed steady or went down over a stretch of time, but the prison population grew. Might that be because the new prisoners came from a different, non-violent, category? Well, as a matter of fact, the number of violent crimes dropped between 1990 to 2006 (1.8 million to 1.4. million). And the prison population grew.

You should also consider what Senethro says. If you want the best information on incarceration rates, wouldn't you go to a journal of criminology or sociology? Why would you go to Investors Business Daily?
 
Last edited:
Just casually linking a piece about race from an institute that famous racist Charles Murray, author of "the bell curve" was a part of

Your mask is slipping @Modder_Mode
 
I'm going to guess you didn't read the book?

I don't make it a habit of mine to read or browse books advocating for scientific racism, especially ones that have been thoroughly discredited and border on pseudoscience, you might though find it appealing amd supportive of your ideology however.
 
Are you judging me for reading a book you haven't read, or the contents of the book you haven't read, or both me and the book?
 
Are you judging me for reading a book you haven't read, or the contents of the book you haven't read, or both me and the book?

I don't have to read Mein Kampf or the protocols of the elders of zion to know they're both racist bunk and I do indeed judge those that would suggest I read them in Ernest

Unless of course you are suggesting there's any validity or grounding to the idea that black people are inherently and genetically less intelligent than whites
 
Back
Top Bottom