The problem with black-on-black crime is not so much that facts are racist, it’s that middle class white lefties don’t get to attention whore and virtue signal on social media that they’re not the wrong kind of white people (i.e. those dirty, buck-toothed hillbillies). If a redneck falls in a forest and a liberal isn’t there to hear it, did it happen?[/quote]
This issue of black-on-black crime is moot. Criminals overwhelmingly victimize people in the communities where they live. But it’s one of those things you constantly hear racists say in their screeds and arguments. It’s a “tell”.[/quote]
Well let’s not start throwing around the racist label so quickly. I’m as lefty liberal as it gets, but there are a lot of facts about black on black crime that go beyond just location and circumstance. Yes obviously socio-economics, institutional racism, and a biased judicial system contribute a lot to the problem, but you can’t just ignore the facts completely here.
It’s not racist to point out that young black males are only about 3% of the national population yet contribute a massively disproportionate amount to the crime stats. How does the problem get fixed by liberals simply glossing over whats actually happening?
[quote=“BrentGolf”]Well let’s not start throwing around the racist label so quickly. I’m as lefty liberal as it gets, but there are a lot of facts about black on black crime that go beyond just location and circumstance. Yes obviously socio-economics, institutional racism, and a biased judicial system contribute a lot to the problem, but you can’t just ignore the facts completely here.
It’s not racist to point out that young black males are only about 3% of the national population yet contribute a massively disproportionate amount to the crime stats. How does the problem get fixed by liberals simply glossing over whats actually happening?[/quote]
Usually when black-on-black crime is mentioned in racist screeds, it’s an irrelevant subject. Both b-on-b crime and w-on-w crime are significantly higher than either w-on-b and b-on-w crime for the simple reason that people tend to victimize others where they live.
The main problem is disproportionate criminality among the black population in the US, something that nobody, left or right, black or white or other, denies. The differences are in the causes. Rationalists point to poverty as the primary causative factor, whereas racists would claim (or imply) that it’s in their DNA.
If you examine impoverished white people and black people, you’ll find that the level of criminality is about the same. So economic hardship is the cause, not skin color.
[quote=“Chris”][quote=“BrentGolf”]Well let’s not start throwing around the racist label so quickly. I’m as lefty liberal as it gets, but there are a lot of facts about black on black crime that go beyond just location and circumstance. Yes obviously socio-economics, institutional racism, and a biased judicial system contribute a lot to the problem, but you can’t just ignore the facts completely here.
It’s not racist to point out that young black males are only about 3% of the national population yet contribute a massively disproportionate amount to the crime stats. How does the problem get fixed by liberals simply glossing over whats actually happening?[/quote]
Usually when black-on-black crime is mentioned in racist screeds, it’s an irrelevant subject. Both b-on-b crime and w-on-w crime are significantly higher than either w-on-b and b-on-w crime for the simple reason that people tend to victimize others where they live.
The main problem is disproportionate criminality among the black population in the US, something that nobody, left or right, black or white or other, denies. The differences are in the causes. Rationalists point to poverty as the primary causative factor, whereas racists would claim (or imply) that it’s in their DNA.
If you examine impoverished white people and black people, you’ll find that the level of criminality is about the same. So economic hardship is the cause, not skin color.[/quote]
In addition to that, poor black communities tend to be urban whereas poor white tend to be rural / semi-rural. The higher population densities in urban areas just makes things more visible and concentrated. If there’s a crackhouse and the associated dealers, gangs in the neighborhood, as there is in a lot of poor urban areas, that creates very visible crime. If there’s a meth lab in a trailer out in the sticks in a low density environment where poor whites are more likely to live, that doesn’t.
[quote=“Chris”] . . . Rationalists point to poverty as the primary causative factor, whereas racists would claim (or imply) that it’s in their DNA.
If you examine impoverished white people and black people, you’ll find that the level of criminality is about the same. So economic hardship is the cause, not skin color.[/quote]
It’s common these days to encounter the “Dear White People” rationalization in academia or mainstream media which asserts that all white people are racist and just need to admit it. Doesn’t this perpetuate racism by justifying the implication that the content of one’s character is in the DNA rather than a universal human condition with skin-color-blind causations?
Yes it does. The assertion that “all white people are racist” is itself a racist sentiment. Of course, the proponents of this idea conveniently redefine racism to exclude themselves. It’s part of why I can’t abide SJWs. I call them the far right of the left, because they’ve abandoned the principles of liberalism and rationality, and become authoritarian and segregationist.
That’s just not true, and it’s not really even close which highlights the problem society is facing these days. What we should be doing is having discussions on WHY the crime rate is so much higher in the black community, because obviously it has nothing to do with DNA or inherent violence. It’s not racist to have serious discussions as to why 3% of the population is responsible for such a massively disproportionate amount of the crime rate. There are things that could be done to improve the situation, but instead we have to go back and forth with people discussing whether it’s actually even happening or not. Finding solutions when you can’t even admit the initial problem is tough.
It’s not just crime, it’s many problems society faces these days. Climate change. Instead of discussing the reasons why it’s happening and what can be done about it, we have to actually waste time debating with people whether it even fucking is or not. :loco: Or like the Islamist terrorist problem. Instead of discussing rational and actionable solutions to the statistically obvious problem, we have to discuss whether there even is a problem in the first place.