Betsy Ross Flag vs Colin Kaepernick (controversial)

VixensVengeance wrote: Why do you feel it’s more likely to happen to you that you are stopped by police? You immediately go to systemic racism but I wonder why? I asked earlier if the other poster researched the other possibilities in this and now I ask you. There is a difference between racism, discrimination and profiling. I think you are conflating the three. Anyone has a right to be a racist. But not anyone has a right to discriminate. If that right to discriminate existed then it would be systemic racism. That is not the case however. ...

Cops can be racist, but I do not believe for a second that the entire police force engages in systematic discrimination. Judges can be racist, but once again, I don’t believe the judicial arm is engaged systemic racism or discrimination.

Again, I appreciate your participation as well as the opinions you shared in this thread. Please do me a favor and watch 1 minute of the following video (starting at 55:00).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX7hni-zGD8

1 minute. Listen to mayor Pete talk about policing in his own city. And if you don't believe me, believe a sitting mayor. I'm not even telling you. I'm asking you. Please believe this man who is in charge and looking at the issues from inside the system. He's not black (not that black people have any motive to make all this up).

thanks

No, you're reading too far into and drawing the wrong correlation from the analogy and then using it to insert words into my mouth to be offended by. Instead of doing that and putting me in a position to defend words I never said if you could answer the question posed it will become more clear. So please answer that question. I'll explain the analogy afterwards to your satisfaction.

Do you see that when you exit your bubble of bias how silly this becomes? You say that all men are created equal.

"we hold these truths to be self evident" That's the language of our Constitution. I don't believe we were created either but it would seem silly to debate the Constitution on that point. No?

I also do not believe there is some universal constant that makes us equal.

This is a personal opinion beyond the scope of our discussion but privately I'd love to know what, in your mind, makes human beings better or worse than other human beings. I don't want to talk about that publicly though.

And I find it offensive that some claim there is a hidden organized agenda to keep some portion of the population from that goal.

Why does that offend you? It is the agenda of the KKK, Nazi, Skinheads, and many others. While some of these group are more so about rhetoric, different groups are at different levels of organization. Groups with members who are in positions of authority simply use that authority according to the agenda of the group. It has been this way since many of the hooded Klansmen were actually members of law enforcement.

https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/

In the South, however, the economics that drove the creation of police forces were centered not on the protection of shipping interests but on the preservation of the slavery system. Some of the primary policing institutions there were the slave patrols tasked with chasing down runaways and preventing slave revolts, Potter says; the first formal slave patrol had been created in the Carolina colonies in 1704. During the Civil War, the military became the primary form of law enforcement in the South, but during Reconstruction, many local sheriffs functioned in a way analogous to the earlier slave patrols, enforcing segregation and the disenfranchisement of freed slaves.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/groups

It’s fallacious and easily disproven

Then please be my guest and disprove it. I'll be quite honest with you. Some historical facts surprised even myself. You hear something and you're like... "nah... that can't be right." And then you find the information from reputable sources. The fact is, times were very different and a lot of whites hated black people. And the more they hated us the more they used their positions of authority to work against us. And a lot of this, frankly, is the same reason a lot of people don't like Mexicans. They're capitalists but they don't want to compete with "other" groups.

The reason why white supremacists love Trump is because the MAGA agenda is an attempt to go back on some of the very changes you cited as progress; especially Affirmative Action. These are rights and dignities people died trying to get and there are those who want to take them away because they don't think "this" America is great because its not an American dream for them because they've lost some of their advantages. But no, unfortunately these things are not conspiracy theories.

https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/jefferson-s-attitudes-toward-slavery/

Ronald Reagon gave us the Anti-Drug Abuse Act which took the racist drug war to the next level. And before you say "that's a conspiracy!" hold on... not so fast.



So yes... this goes up to the office of the presidency, creating policies for law enforcement officers to carry out whether each individual officer is racist or not. But it was the system that proposed these policies targeting people based on race and it was the system that gave them harsher punishments (crack vs cocaine). So while I understand these things are hard to believe for those who really haven't had cause to investigate or delve deep into this side of history... I understand... but in not doing so you can't simply assume that everyone who says something different is automatically wrong. Investigate! If you truly find something different let me know. I'm not against you! I'm against corruption. There are scores of examples of racism, systematic and otherwise. It's never gone away. It's just done a better job of hiding itself because at some point the police simply couldn't keep letting random people lynch and murder black people. And I hope you're not going to say that didn't happen either.

No mention of race was ever shown or heard except by the ones arrested themselves claiming without grounds that it’s because they were black.

If that's your standard then I give up. I yield. Because people doing bad things do not typically announce it unless they have to (such as bank robber taking hostages).

However it also has stats that show whites are arrested at a much higher rate than blacks for specific crimes as well. So what are we supposed to believe?

There was a time when I didn't think black people were serial killers. Someone proved me wrong. It's all about getting caught. Police aren't magic. If they were, they wouldn't be going off of general descriptions like 6 foot, black, and bald. Do you know how many black men are 6 foot? Do you know how many black men are bald or have very short hair? I sometimes get mistaken for a pro football player just because of my size, color, and dreadlocks. That's not enough to lock someone up when that person isn't doing anything suspicious. The problem is that it is very easy for people to make excuses. The excuses people use are designed not to make them look bad. They're not idiots. They're not going to say "golly gee whiz, I thought that black guy did it because... he was black!" That's not at all reality. The cop is going to look for other things before or after the fact that he can use to say why the person was suspicious or why he had to stop them "oh he had a broken tail light and I just happened to randomly search his vehicle". They're not stupid. People use "dog whistles" in politics. Do you really think no one is sophisticated enough to disguise their racism? Or do you think I'm am not sophisticated enough to buy this narrative that unless its stated verbatim its not racist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics

I think it comes down, once again, to honesty. We need to stop focusing on one aspect of an issue in bias and ignoring everything else just to prop up a belief system. Bad and unfair things sometimes happen to blacks (to all of us no matter the race). But that does not give them the right to claim systematic racial discrimination if there is just no overarching evidence for it beyond those occasional incidents.

Again, I've give you a bunch of evidence at this point to show you that it's real, including admissions from police, a mayor, and presidential staff member. At this point I don't know what, if anything, could convince you so we should probably just agree to disagree. Is that fair?

I did take a look at your video, Zealotx, as you requested. Setting aside the fact that your request is not only an argument ad populum but also a plea to authority, the speaker is one of the democratic presidential candidates that has recently come under fire from the black population of the community he is currently mayor of. I also researched this mayor and the incident in question that he speaks of. I find his motivations to be suspect because of my findings. He appears to be trying to appease what I am seeing as an unjustly angry voting base in order to further his career. I understand the incident in question is still under investigation but there is no blatant evidence that the shooting was not justified. The suspect that was shot was engaged in suspicious activity by being partially in a car after a report of someone in the area breaking into cars and when he was confronted by the officer, the suspect left the car carrying a large knife raised over his head and began walking toward the officer while ignoring commands to stop and drop the knife.

The family of the person shot has already filed a civil lawsuit against the city and the police dept before the investigation is even concluded which to me is a bias in itself because they have already decided that the officer is guilty of misconduct without any evidence. I understand emotions run high but this is the exact thing I am speaking of, assuming guilt and not innocence because of a reverse racial bias by blacks that white cops are out to get them. The mayor, instead of supporting his police force and enacting proper means to investigate this issue and correct short comings in his police force has instead thrown them to the wolves in order to try and preserve his voting base. This has not fixed anything and instead has exacerbated the situation by further dividing the community instead of bringing it together! I view him as a bad mayor and he has even admitted himself that he has and continues to fail his people.

He should be remaining objective in this investigation and be providing every means to get a fair outcome without taking sides. He should be supporting his police force in their duties and using any means available to internally investigate any wrong doing, while doing everything he can to bring the community together in this. And he should be enforcing better protocols and procedures in his police force so that body cams are better utilized and the best training is provided to them in every aspect of their police work including cultural diversity and he should be making much better efforts to recruit minority officers to the force by presenting the force as a valuable and productive place to work instead of unfairly condemning them. These are the actions of a good mayor. But he has failed to take any of these actions. Now he fights two battles instead of one. The local fraternal order of police have issued an open letter, saying that Buttigieg's intentions in the matter are purely political, and that his approach to the shooting has only created greater division within the city. His actions only served to further the divide by propagating rumors there is no evidence for. He has failed his office in almost every way possible.

Thank you for watching the video.

VixensVengeance wrote: the suspect left the car carrying a large knife raised over his head and began walking toward the officer while ignoring commands to stop and drop the knife.

Is that what you saw? Or what the officer said happened? You're telling us what the suspect did as if there is no question. This is the same formula that many cops use in order to justify murder. We've seen numerous videos in a short time span of officers yelling commands and even when the person tries to comply they get shot anyway and the story changes to something else. "oh I thought he was reaching for a gun." "uh maybe because you asked for his license and registration?"

Do you think police officers always tell the truth? Seriously. You can be suspicious of the mayor (who I pointed you to because he's dealing with this right now and handled it poorly in the past) but your suspicious seems to stop shy of the police officer in question. Why is that? Is it because being less critical of him supports your already established beliefs?

The reason you shouldn't take Buttigieg's statement as political is because he already went at it from the other side and knows that view isn't popular among whites who are the majority of his voters. There is overwhelming support among whites for the police; almost similar to support for American troops. Saying anything against either opens you up for attack. And black people in his district are not going to give him a pass for paying lip service if he didn't even believe what he was saying. If you investigated then you are already aware of what he did previously to upset the black community in his area.

Buttigieg said:
“The fact that a black person is four times as likely as a white person to be incarcerated for the exact same crime is evidence of systematic racism,” Buttigieg said. “With all due respect, sir, racism makes it harder for good police officers to do their job, too. It’s a smear on law enforcement.”

The officer has reportedly made racial comments before and this man he killed was 54. You want me to believe that a 54 yr old man, armed only with a knife, was not only breaking into cars but was willing to take on an armed and trained police officer? And we're supposed to believe an officer who was wearing a body cam but just so happened not to have had it turned on? Do you really believe that? Is it something you would do or something you think a black person would do?

I apologize, I’m trying to keep up here so give me a bit! lol


Zealotx, I apologize if I inserted words into your mouth. That was not my intent. Ok, I will answer the question. No I would not be satisfied with that progress. I would make every effort to continue to free myself.

As well yes you are right about the constitution. I am not trying to debate that. In fact it makes my point that social and political structures are the means to equal men, not innate universal or implied rights.

And I may have been over zealous about my claiming of offense. You are absolutely right that certain groups seek to oppress certain other groups simply because they are different than them. Christians are a classic example of this. They seek to oppress others just as much as any of the racist groups you describe. I guess what I was mostly talking about was the general bulk of the population as opposed to fringe groups whose goal or mission it is to oppress others. So you make an important distinction here. I rescind my statement and modify it to say that I am talking about social structures like police forces and our constitution and laws whose mission statements are one of inclusion of all human beings. Meaning I don’t believe there are organized, subversive infiltrators that proliferate such structures with the intent of undermining the equality this nation was designed to bring forth. In light of this modified stance on my part, I believe I have been proving the claim that systematic racism is a fallacious belief.

I am also not a fan of affirmative action. I understand what it was intended for but the down side of it is that it favors a group based on race instead of qualification. Once again, instead of giving a race an unfair advantage over others, why didn’t we spend that money on better education for that race!!! This would have allowed them to become better qualified for those positions and become competitive in those markets instead of giving them a carte blanche opportunity. As for the “racist drug war” (a term I have never heard before, and would need to research) well now we are legalizing marijuana in many states despite its continued federal mandate as a schedule 1 drug. Another prime example of racial progress enacted by the people over the deep state if your claims are true!

Im not sure what you mean by “my standard”? I simply evaluated the evidence objectively and came to a reasonable conclusion on those videos. Can you show me where any of those individuals were singled out unjustly just because they were black? If so I will concede my point.

Do you know how many white people are 6 foot and bald? If the description of black were to have been left out then the chances of catching the bad guy are increased 2 fold. Every bit of description that can be given must be used. I agree it must be used fairly but it still must be used. It simply narrows the field of suspects and I find that reasonable. I have been stopped and detained because of a description before. I was arrested and held for 6 hours until my finger prints came back as no match. It was an incident where I was screwing around late at night and someone else fitting my description had broken into a construction site. I’m a white female. If the white part had been left out of the description they might have arrested a black girl and then guess what… she would have complained that it was only because she was black and they should have used white in the description. Hehehe I don’t mean that to be offensive, just a bit of a snark in fun. My point is that we as a society can’t have it both ways.

I don’t think we have to agree to disagree here. I think we can come to a consensus. I have enjoyed seeing the other side of these arguments and I have tried to present my own in a coherent manner. My goal in this was to get us to agree that crying racism is not the best approach to these problems. I think education is the best approach. I agree that racism exists so concur with you there. But I don’t believe that systemic racism exists and I want you to agree with me through my presentation of my thoughts. Instead I want us both to agree to two things.

1. Acts and incidents of racism do exist
2. Education is the best means we have available to end that racism and unite people.

Better education of minorities in order to get them better places in society and the work force and to reduce succumbing to a life of crime. Better education for police forces in social awareness, de-escalation procedures and cultural diversity. Better education of the general public to teach us all how to better address and report incidents of racism when they see it. Better education of our elected officials to create and enforce policies that are designed to unite people instead of divide them. And more cultural diversity training and interaction in our public schools so that the next generation grows up not seeing color but instead seeing the individual. What do you think?

To comment briefly on your last post. Age has nothing to do with ability to commit crime. I dont know if the car he was in was his or not. Reports didnt say. People do all sorts of stupid stuff like suicide by cop. I also dont know his mental state. The report of the cop was cooberated by witnesses as well. Also I never said I made a judgement on the cops innocent or guilt. I cant because I don't know all the facts of the case. The investigation is still under way. If he is guilty he should be punished accordingly.

But I will assume him innocent until proven guilty. Same goes for the man shot. That is not a bias but a constitutional right. I wonder In return why you assume the worst intent of the cop and assume him guilty but not the man shot?

I was listening to this YouTube video the other day (wish I could find it), Simon Sinek was talking about the Infinte Game (in short, there are two types of games: finite games - play to win - and infinite games - keep the game going), and he offered that oftentimes what we do isn't consistent with our values (who we are), because we are tying to play a finite game when we should be playing an infinite game. He offered the following example of the United States:

When our soldiers are in battle and we shoot the enemy, we will go, pick up our enemy, and take them to the nearest medical center so he can get medical attention. This is something that is obviously not in our interest... but it is guided by who we are. It makes us predictable. And it lets our allies know who we are, and they can either stand with us... or against us.

He goes on to talk about how current (last 50 years) foreign policy has been characterized by the US attempting a finite game (we were trying to "win" in Vietnam, Vietcong were fighting to stay alive), which has led us to stray from our values (who we are).

I am pretty sure that there is a fair share of bigots who would rather have black people return to being slaves (or just move to another country), turn away immigrants, leave women in the kitchen and all that stuff.

But I get the feeling that the bulk of people who want the US to be great again really sense this loss of identity, of the United States of America no longer standing for justice and freedom, as it once did (or at least was perceived around the world). This is why distrust in government is at an all time high. People used to trust institutions and used to hold them in high regard. People used to trust government and law enforcement officials to be honorable and dignity. The US was a shining example of a beacon of light in the world. No more.

This is why it is easy for radical political groups to pinpoint any given group and declare them as the "cause" for this loss of values. You have the radical right blaming feminazis, antifa, transexuals and social justice warrios. On the other hand the radical left demonizes neonazis, mainstream christians, business owners and billionares).

It's easy to blame others.

@VV
No apologies needed and thank you for answering the question. Of course I knew you wouldn't be satisfied with that progress. Who would? With that said, I do think we can continue and probably arrive at the conclusions you mentioned. We'll be in the same chapter at least if not the same page. And that's good. I'm glad we can enjoy each other's perspective. Your perspective is very important because a lot of people think the same way you do. I don't say this to minimize your individuality but rather as a recognition that you have a logical process that leads you to this conclusion according to the information you have available. I have no problems with your logical thought process. I only hope I can insert extra information into it and maybe you can do the same for me; show me what perhaps I haven't seen. And then we're both better off for it.

It's not that black people are still slaves. It's that black people are still mistreated, oppressed, and marginalized in a relationship where the side that used to be masters still have most of the power. It's simply done in a way that is far more under the radar and can't be communicated without video evidence. We're recording now and that's why there are all these stories of black people getting harassed, not just by cops, but by random white people in general emboldened by the current administration. There are no slave masters but plenty of people who want to be a master race.

This racism is nuanced by subconscious bias and the acceptance of stereotypes. People judge you based on an idea that you are "more likely" to be lazy, be late, be violent, steal, etc. Whether the same person thinks their race is superior or not, may not actually be the case. So I can understand why many people might say "racial" but not "racist". There's a whole lot of grey area and people in the grey area don't want to be labeled as if they're full blown racist when they're merely influenced by racists, employed by racists, have racist friends and family, etc.

I had paragraphs lined up to argue the opposite position but I decided to delete them and take different approach. Because I think the conversation, that needs to happen and keep happening, is fueled by a lot of contrasting ideas that react to each other when people are really more in the middle than labels tend to suggest.

So instead of hearing me say "Everything is racist!" which I'm not actually trying to say... what I'd like you to hear me say is that IDENTITY plays a lot into our decisions. Years ago I would not have chosen to spend any amount of time with a homosexual. I was uncomfortable around them. And I was influenced by the bible and Rastafarianism via reggae. Still am to some degree but I'm also influenced by things that mitigate those influences. For example... you talked about Christianity and I agree 100% there. The intolerance there is amazing and it doesn't tend to change in isolation. What they perceive to be a religion about love is simply applicable who ever they deem worthy. And there's a lot of other issues with bible based religions as well. Point is I think isolation is extremely problematic where diversity actually helps people to confront whatever their learned behaviors and biases so "we" can get past them. I don't have the "old white lady clutching her purse" happen to me now but I don't live in an isolated white community. I live in a diverse community (which is fantastic).

So you also have to apply this to what I'm saying about policing. Every neighborhood isn't the same. But let's say you have an officer who lived or lives in an isolated white community but his patrol area includes a black community. I think of ideas similar to DNA or RNA. It's just information. A virus is made up of genetic material and is capable of latching onto and getting inside a host. Racism was a viral idea based on other ideas that feed it. These "other ideas" are like HIV. It's not full blown AIDS. The person simply suffers from an inability to see black people the same as whites. Is that racist? One could argue this falls short of racism. But if you combine this idea with power/authority and perhaps it combines with one or more other "lesser" ideas... then it becomes full blown racism. People are infected and don't even know they have it and swear they don't; sometimes even after being caught on video.

Everyone would like racism to be one clear and easy thing. It's not. And we can only see the virus when it rises to the surface. And by its nature it is unwanted by most people. Very few people are sort of "proud to be racist". Those are the people who don't give a crap what society thinks. And part of their racism IS based on wanting to be different from and go against the norms of society. But for most people racism is an ugly thing. Like HIV they might not want to tell people they have it since it could result in being shunned. A lot of profiles on Tindr now say if you're racist or right wing swipe left. We're so anti that we create labels and those labels may apply but the labels often force people underground, force their ideas into hiding, cause them not to benefit from diversity. Two people with HIV can have sex to their hearts content. Two racists can swap ideas (instead of bodily fluids) all day without protection, not worried about saying the "wrong thing" because they already think alike on most issues. And so why do they need to stop being racist when they don't need to be in relationships with anyone who isn't?

Now, I do NOT believe that racists collude to do systematic or institutional racism. I do not believe there is a smoky back room somewhere with KKK meetings (although KKK meetings do exist) talking about how they're going to change the laws to destroy black people. I hope that's not what you thought I was talking about. That's not what institutional racism is. No one needs to do that. However, do groups get together for the advancement of the group? Absolutely. Do they use their social circles to create opportunities and advantages for each other? Absolutely, and it's legal. Fraternities and Sororities are based on this. The Masonic Lodge is based on this. Hell, the Moose Lodge is based on this. So yes... this is a thing.

Now back in the day, KKK had meetings and they would have to plan and coordinate lynchings and things like that. However, they don't NEED to do that anymore and so they don't. Why not? Because as long as there are like minded people in certain positions they don't need to tell them what to do. And that means all they have to do is use their influence to get them elected. If you elect a racist sheriff you don't have to give him commands after that. You can just trust he's going to do racist things. So if you have a certain caucus, or white nationalist like Steve Bannon as a strategist and you have media outlets echoing your talking points. All you have to do is play on those stereotypes and keep attacking affirmative action and other initiatives designed to offset the effects of racism. You talk about law and order and MS13 and Muslim terrorists and you just don't talk about the Dylan Roofs and others who are presently attending training camps and acting like terror cells. And now there are internet forums with encryption, email, and text messages on burner phones. No one is going to organize in the same old fashioned way like people used to. Everyone evolves; including racists.

Zealotx, I would like you to watch a video now, And then I would like you to read an article about that same video to see the difference in reporting this incident. The first is sensationalist and spins the story in such a way that it is totally unfair to the police and serves only to divide the issue into us vs them. The second article is actually an unbiased interview with the actual person and it seems a much more honest account of it comes out in the second story. This sort of junk is why I hate The Young Turks.

Here are a few points to consider in the video as well. I would love to get your thoughts on this.

At 0:13 – commentator says the kid was arrested for nothing. This is not true. In fact I don’t think he was ever under arrest, he was detained because of what I would assume is reasonable suspicion.

At 1:55 – commentator says the issue was that cops got beat on the court and retaliated. There is absolutely no evidence for this.

At 2:25 - commentator claims cops were embarrassed and retaliated. Once again, no evidence. He goes on to say they arrested him the next day. This is also false, it was 2 days later.

At 2:35 – commentator claims cops searched his car. This is false. They actually searched his friend’s car

At 2:58 – commentator claims cops might have been looking for his friend. Also false. The car was in a place known for drug activity. Nothing mentions why they were stopped though so there is no evidence either way as to why they were detained above this.

At 3:30 – commentator mentions thank god there was no tazing or shooting. No one ever mentions the fact that they ever resisted or were in any danger or fled the scene, even though the commentator also mentions it was good they did not. This is just inflationary sensationalism based on pure conjecture.

At 4:40 – commentator comments that the cops disparaged and shanked all that good will the built up. Again, just inflammatory words designed to cut down one side. They never mention that the cops could have just been trying to do their job the best they could. Are we to expect now that if a cop plays basketball with someone they are not allowed to then later arrest them ever for a crime??? Ridiculous.

At 4:44 – commentator implies that being stopped by the cops or detained will lead to getting fired from your job. Again this is just inflationary and designed to demonize cops.

At 5:16 – commentator claims it was a false arrest. In the first place I don’t believe anyone was ever even arrested. They were detained, which is quite different. And secondly if it was a false arrest the cops would have been punished. What the commentator is trying to do here is depict the police force as being systematically racist and covering for each other. I don’t believe this for one second.

At 5:42 – commentator claims cops have been able to “get away” with 280 fatal shootings without prosecution. This is just nuts. It implies that cops are just out there waving guns and shooting people without discretion and it’s all being covered up. More sensationalism designed to evoke a negative response to police that is completely unfair.

At 7:28 – commentator claims this would have never happened to a rich person. How does he know this? If a rich person were down in a known drug area under the same circumstance it would happen to them as well. It’s happened to me so I have some ground to stand on here.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rllRn2zMRLo&t=121s


https://www.phillyvoice.com/samir-hill-no-hard-feelings-after-crossover-arrest/


So I ask you, how is any of this sensationalist garbage (like TYT) doing any good to heal the wounds or mend the rifts between races? All it is doing is furthering the divide and polarizing people against one another. This has to stop in favor of better and more constructive means to bring people together!

By this logic you can't be offended by anything.

And also by this logic everything people do to each other is "the Force" so why be offended at all?

That's right. Being offended has got to be the dumbest thing anyone can possibly do.