https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...rchid=61767022

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...7&postcount=52

It was like he didn't really try but it seemed expedient to just concede that there is in fact some positive hiphop. As far as what is played on mainstream and marketed perhaps that's another story but I'll admit I'm not in that loop and I'm sure there are some fringe cases.
But that the media promotes things that aren't healthy shouldn't be shocking.

Found this from UC Berkeley School of Public Health (taken from a report about Latino gang members, but the conclusions apply across all racial groups):

https://hiaucb.files.wordpress.com/2...tsheet2015.pdf

I'm reminded of this interesting article on legalization of gangs in Ecuador. Note I'm not really trying to make a strong claim like "we should legalize gangs in the US", but I do think it's interesting to recognize some of the complexity of what goes on, and how solutions can take dramatically different forms than we're typically primed to look for.

Seems a bit vague to mean. What exactly are these racist "socioeconomic issues" that are the culprit.

Perhaps it was your strange usage of the word preponderance that made me misunderstand you. I’ve already explained the factors I think contribute to gang participation rather than “black culture.”

I am almost positive that the bolded is a complete logic fail.

What if, for the next fifty years, we let all white players in the major leagues hit with metal bats and forced all black and Hispanic players to hit with wood bats. Hitting v. pitching ebbs and flows in the major leagues as rules are changed, the ball changes, the strike zone changes, etc.

According to your logic, if the hitting trends for non-white players generally tracked the trend for white players -- that is, the non-white hitters generally did better in the same years the white hitters did better and generally did worse in the same years the white hitters did worse -- then we could safely conclude that hitting with wood bats was not a disadvantage for non-white players.

That's patently ridiculous.

Everyone always has better analogies than me.

This sentence has something interjected into it that does not remotely align with what i wrote.

I don’t think you understand what the word myth means? From your link: Meth use and associated white incarceration rates are a red herring, and provide little evidence supporting the idea that structural racism in the criminal justice system and how drug war was implemented (which are well documented) are a
myth.

Maybe you should try actually explaining what your views are? Seems like that would clear things up.

It's actually terrible.

Your attempt to show failure is flawed. The performance difference between a wooden bat and metal bat is relatively static, and measurable. You will get a certain percentage of performance increase using a metal bat, as opposed to a wooden bat. To draw a parallel to your analogy, a wooden bat is racism, but racism is oppressive and has a cumulative affect, which makes it dissimilar to your differences in bats.

You'd have to believe racism has a static performance impact, similar to the different bats....in other words, you would have to believe its only going to oppress a percentage of the population, and that percentage would be relatively unchanged relative to other demographics, during the entire time period tested. All the while a significant, if not majority, of the population produces at, or near, or above the performance levels of people using the metal bat. Metal bats do not impact the game this way.

The drug war started because Nixon campaigned on racism and law and order. It was certainly a racist assault. It continued in many racist directions like disparity in the treatment of crack and powdered cocaine, but the fact that the government accumulated power because of that racism and then used that power against white people, mostly poor white people, is hardly evidence that there's no structural racism.

It is something that should be a lesson along the lines of "first they came for the minorities, but I wasn't a minority". But the non-millionaire GOP electorate isn't very bright about actually voting in their own best interests.

Yeah, drug treatment was racist.

I mean, this is a Vox article:

https://www.vox.com/2016/3/29/113257...n-war-on-drugs

I see. So you believe that, for the last fifty years, it has been easier to get ahead if you are black than if you are white, all things considered.

It's possible that not even David Duke would agree with that proposition.

No. I think drawing that conclusion is bizarre.

In the history of racism and its effects on the relative wealth and poverty of white and Black people you can't overlook the 50s and 60s when the US government made it its mission to get every white family owning a little suburban house.

What's always ignored is, 90% of wealth is lost by the third generation.

I never claimed that metal bats were a perfect proxy for the structural advantages enjoyed by white people. Of course the impact of metal bats is easier to measure than the impact of racism.

I was using the analogy to point out the absurdity of your statement about trends.

It's also worth noting that, the moment you give someone a metal bat, the disadvantage of hitting with a wood bat disappears. The disadvantages associated with institutional racism don't disappear overnight just because you pass the CRA or make some other change in law.

Did you read the whole article? Like down to where Nixon created the DEA (precursor to it)?

And Reagan, Bush and Clinton all ran on being tough on drugs and enacted terrible laws and built up a monsterous policing and imprisoning system all built up around racist rhetoric around crack ("smokable cocaine" as Reagan called it, militarizing urban police forces (1033 program) and super-predators.

Citation please?

How did you get this "statistic"? The source I find for it is Tim Voorhees, some rando lawyer and wealth advisor pulling it out of his butt in like 2013 and then people calling that research. Do you have some study? I wouldn't think so. If not, though I'm curious about how this "information" travelled.

And before that time everyone was using drugs with no problems? Cocaine and heroin aren't grown here so how did they make their way into black communities? Entrepreneurs?

First they shipped off tons of blacks to Vietnam, started importing heroin in the 70s. They fueled the cocaine surge in the 80s and heavily policed black communities while brainwashing everyone with gangsta music and hip hop culture while separating black families with the war on drugs. And yeah...guns are cheap are easily accessible. So are lives after you watch a thousand murders on tv. It's all connected.
(Also I could mention the educational system)

Well, Heroin was a brand name trademarked by Bayer in 1895 and cocaine was an active ingredient in Coca-Cola and a common drug.