The results of systemic racism exist. This is at least the 20th time I've answered this question.

It's important to distinguish between the problem systemic racism and the results of systemic racism. They are two different problems/solutions. This basic thought is incomprehensible to these folks, especially Cupee, RF, etc.

Removing racism doesn't fix the inequity, and if there is very little racism, it's not going to accomplish anything.

Also these folks don't care about inequity, or they'd look at the poor South relative to the rest of the country and complain about that to, but the South is the US's step child.

I mean is it really surprising that a guy who aligns himself with literal kkk members and modern neo-nazis politically doesn't like talking about efforts to address racism other than to look for ways to critique those efforts? Sometimes things really are just as obvious as they look. Sorry

Q@ I'm done wasting my time with you. You are like the rest, you just repeat the same point over and over again you don't actually contend with what I posted.

CRT doesn't address racism, if anything it perpetuates it. I mean, you can assert that it does, but you don't know anything about it and are unwilling to defend it... so you can make your claims of racist associations, but you're just like the rest of these folks. There's nothing behind your argument other than claiming someone is a racist for opposing CRT, a theory or collection of theories that you admittedly don't know s*** about. Braniaic that you are

Tell me how CRT addresses racism?

People 'repeat the same stuff to you' as you repeat the same tired, beaten down and debunked nonsense.

You were the one that brought this back up, named me, to get it going again to then act like a victim that it is 'going again'.

The key here is for you to stop saying the same silly stuff we trounced prior if you don't want us to repeat the debunking.

The Farm Subsidy is certainly the institutionalizing of systemic, institutionalized gov't policy and racism.

Now take your advice and stop repeating yourself that it is not. Or don't, and again repeat yourself, and don't cry when we do too.

Here's an analogy even Cupee can understand:

Racism or systemic racism is a misalignment on a car. The results of that misalignment is going to be uneven tire wear for right side tires.

CRT uses the tire wear as evidence of continued systemic racism.

Tire wear in this analogy has many different context... generational addiction, teenage pregnancy, generational incarceration, and a bunch of other stuff.

I don't deny the car still a little bit of alignment but it's nowhere near to the extent it used to be and it's likely has a very little impact on tire wear today, but the tire wear it still there.

CRT and progressives mostly think fixing the alignment again or better is going to do something about the tire wear that currently exists, but that tire wear is an entirely different problem.

Of course it's a type of democracy. It's not a direct democracy because we elect representatives but you do speak to the point I was making so, thanks.

Stonewalling what ?

We don't have to agree with you when you insist there's no systemic racism. No matter how many times you say it.

Also, conflating belief in the existence of systemic racism with being a proponent of CRT is about as piss poor as you can get. Just ****ing lazy.

Try harder. I order it. Comply son.

When it comes to overt gov't blatantly racist policies of the past that gutted farms of POC and gave that wealth and Production to White farmers that was like taking all four wheels off of the cars driven by POC.


Today when it comes to gov't saying 'we will take tax dollars from everyone and give that money back only to people who have cars with wheels', that is just locking in and institutionalizing that prior racism.

One might expect some restitution to the POC farms but no. But this is worse than dong nothing. The POC farmers TODAY would fair better and have more of a chance to compete if the gov't would just stay out. Leave the whites their prior advantage and stay out as opposed to giving them 97% of all the current funds they are now giving away.

Only a real dummy would fix the alignment and then drive on unsafe tires.

The real dummy insist focusing on the alignment will fix the tire wear, and the insane person will argue to purposely misalign the car to get the tires even.

Not just for IHIV.
Since the George Floyd thread I've wondered how to fix the wear on that tire. The govt needs to give out a bunch of free ****? That doesn't seem like it will fix anything but could be a good start.
Any ideas how to make up for past systemic racism?

You need to figure out how you fix worn tires. Those generational issues I was speaking about. Doesn't matter what you do to make up for the misalignment. For instance, If the dealership you bought the car from that sold you a car with a bad alignment gives you a bunch of money, that doesn't necessarily mean the tire gets fixed.

What the analogy doesn't account for is the difficulty in fixing the tire. Fixing the tires incredibly difficult. How we know this is the same percentage of white people are poor as they were 50 years ago, adjusted for good and bad economic times. Those folks have worn tires for various other reasons.

Just like at least 80% or more of white farmers don't get any real aid from the government.

I'm wondering if you have any real world thoughts though. For instance the 1st thing that comes to my mind is spreading out low income housing everywhere. Yes people are going to be pissed about their property values but some of these inner city communities feel like a prison and were created by historical racism. Changing the environment that kids grow up in is probably a big deal.

Education. Mental Health in schools. Focus on teaching introduction to trades (i.e. auto mechanics, plumbers, med techs, paralegals) in urban highschools. Housing doesn't really fix generational issues, but some of these trades make good money (more than a a lot of these majors white kids choose, and are in demand). Urban schools need to teach kids stuff that gives them a competitive edge.

In fact, if I had to do it again, I would not have selected intelligence analyst as my MOS in the Army. My ASVABs scores qualified me for any job in the Army. I would have been a mechanic, or some other high demand trade.

Just seems shitty that institutional racism has created these absolute **** neighborhoods that pose such a bigger challenge to succeed from. If I was a parent I would probably be dying to get my kids out of those neighborhoods but can see that a lot of people may not have the means. Those neighborhoods are just ****ed, would like to see people who want, to get a helping hand to get out.

Agree that trade school is way underestimated. Especially with more automation coming a plumber is a good skill to have.

I agree that eliminating current racial discrimination won't do much for blacks, at least in an economic sense. It's hard to put a price tag on the psychological effects, though. But I think this infographic points towards not a lot of workplace/employment racial discrimination by way of black immigrants:




But I think it also points towards the presence of systemic racism, indicated by the significant gap between AA and black immigrant income. Again, I don't really care what we call that income disparity. (Nor do I think antiracists care too much either so long as the term carries the normative implications of something that should not have happened and therefore warrants a remedy.) What I was attempting to do with my question was to avoid all of this terminological mischief and get directly to whether or not something occurred that warrants remedy. Not necessarily a race-specific remedy like reparations but simply doing something that results in an improvement in outcomes for blacks. Of course people opposing the antiracist supported solution(s) will then be called racists but that's just how ideological battles are fought.

Around the time of the dot-com bubble I was confidently predicting that perhaps half the workforce would be self-employed by now. How about teaching kids entrepreneurship? In other words give them some of the advantages/privileges that entrepreneurs give their kids, who have an outcome on par with kids of professionals. Sure couldn't hurt.

I don't know if it's just me but IHIV's car analogy made made a lot of sense to me.

I guess my stumbling block is that when it comes to applying that train of thought to things in the real world, like farmers, my impression was that IHIV neither wants to fix neither the alignment nor the tire.

To the contrary. I'm convinced a central government is terrible at aligning cars, and fixing tires, especially for a country as large as the US. Why? Because the misalignment and tire wear is vastly different between regions, states and cities. There isn't a one-size-fits-all solution.

Local government has to be at the forefront at any solution you want to present. Cities compete with each other. Cities should focus on giving their workforce a competitive advantage. The focus on equity, policing, racism, entitlements, republicans, testing standards et al isn't going to to do jack ****. Opportunity to succeed is what's going to do the most good. There's inefficiencies in the marketplace to where cities can find avenues to target.

Trying to make more black farmers is just stupid. One, you can't really get too much wealth farming. Two, the government wanted bigger farms to make sure the food supply was stable, economically and safer. Three, not a lot of farming land in the urban city where vast majority of minorities live.

So it's nice that you have a position on centralised/decentralised government here in the abstract, but when we were discussing the farmer situation you both wanted to deny that there was any misalignment (that it was systemic racism) and also that anything should actually be done to restore the tires (additional assistance to black farmers).

Your last paragraph is even saying this, albeit with the misrepresentation that what people want can be reduced to "more black farmers". You think it's stupid to fix this problem. You want to ignore it and move on to whatever new system you prefer, not actually fix the thing in the analogy that's broken.

But handing huge piles of money to make more white farmers is just plain common sense.

I oppose farming subsidies.

I oppose farming subsidies. Stating why the government is doing something is not an endorsement.

As always, you have no real response other than attack me with false assertions. If you want black farmers, put 4H/FFA in school and mandate blacks take it....but I would not support that. If you don't mandate it, you are likely aren't going to get a big uptake. Just as there isn't a big uptake in little league.

There isn't anything inherently wrong with disparities. This is where you run into the NBA analogy. There's nothing wrong with the disparity, irrespective of how it came to be.

Current funding for NBA players or farming doesn't discriminate. I don't deny that disparity in both exists because previous discrimination.

You're the insane person that wants to misalign the car so the tires are even, but that's not what's going to happen. You're going to wreck the car by doing that. And we're back to if you don't agree with the stupid solution of the left you're denying something, which is intellectually dishonest, but is the only response to the left has to criticism. You are doing exactly what I say you all do.

If you think there's an issue with disparities, you should support a massive wealth transfer to the nation of Sudan, or other poor countries, from the US, because the US is the beneficiary of huge disparities as result of capitalism, and access/leveraging of those resources for the benefit of it's people.

You’ve spent the whole thread defending them, but okay.