The Data of Hate • Hacker News Board

Re: The Data of Hate

#111

Post by igravious » Mon, Jul 14, 2014, 5:12 PM UTC

henrymercer wrote: post #107

igravious wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... "I am being too hard on black people" ... I'm doing more than that. I'm calling you out. That word `legitimate' is very sneaky. I'd say it's close to racist to assert that black on white crime is a "legitimate problem" rather than just a "social problem" or a plain old "problem". There are _fucking_ well documented systemic _reasons_ for why there may be statistically more (per capita or whatever) black on whit…

"That word `legitimate' is very sneaky. I'd say it's close to racist to assert that black on white crime is a "legitimate problem" rather than just a "social problem" or a plain old "problem"." I have no idea what you are talking about. By legitimate, I simply mean "real" or "not imagined". I mean that the problem actually exists in reality, as a opposed to a problem that exists only in the heads of the stormfronters…

Yes you're right. It's black people that are the problem.

Not centuries of subjugation and mistreatment.

Not racism.

By your own admission you've come to adopt a viewpoint you once regarded as racist.

What's more likely, (a) that you don't view the (still racist) position as racist now that you hold it _or_ (b) the position has somehow become un-racist. I'm going with a.

Re: The Data of Hate

#112

Post by henrymercer » Mon, Jul 14, 2014, 5:55 PM UTC

igravious wrote: post #111

henrymercer wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That word `legitimate' is very sneaky. I'd say it's close to racist to assert that black on white crime is a "legitimate problem" rather than just a "social problem" or a plain old "problem"." I have no idea what you are talking about. By legitimate, I simply mean "real" or "not imagined". I mean that the problem actually exists in reality, as a opposed to a problem that exists only in the heads of the stormfronters…

Yes you're right. It's black people that are the problem. Not centuries of subjugation and mistreatment. Not racism. By your own admission you've come to adopt a viewpoint you once regarded as racist. What's more likely, (a) that you don't view the (still racist) position as racist now that you hold it _or_ (b) the position has somehow become un-racist. I'm going with a.

(c) it depends how you define racist. If you define racism as exhibiting personal animosity or prejudice to people one knows of another race, due to the color of their skin, then I am not a racist. If you define racism as identifying and pattern matching general problems that break down along ethnic and racial lines, then I am a racist. You can choose your own definition, I'll choose mine. How we define the word is not interesting to me. The real question is, are my views morally repugnant? I do not think so. If you think they are, then say exactly why.

Also, I sure as heck do not believe that white people are blameless in this whole crime and urban decay situation. There is a lot of blame to go around. I really do not care about blame or about who is at fault, just in identifying cause and effect and solving the problem. Denying the problem as legitimate, or attributing false reasons to the crime problem is neither useful nor constructive. (Subjugation and mistreatment of blacks by whites is and was a huge problem, but it is not causing the crime problem, and it is not helping anyone to pretend that it is).

Re: The Data of Hate

#113

Post by igravious » Tue, Jul 15, 2014, 8:55 AM UTC

henrymercer wrote: post #112

igravious wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you're right. It's black people that are the problem. Not centuries of subjugation and mistreatment. Not racism. By your own admission you've come to adopt a viewpoint you once regarded as racist. What's more likely, (a) that you don't view the (still racist) position as racist now that you hold it _or_ (b) the position has somehow become un-racist. I'm going with a.

(c) it depends how you define racist. If you define racism as exhibiting personal animosity or prejudice to people one knows of another race, due to the color of their skin, then I am not a racist. If you define racism as identifying and pattern matching general problems that break down along ethnic and racial lines, then I am a racist. You can choose your own definition, I'll choose mine. How we define the word is n…

Henry. Thanks for taking the time to debate me on this. I appreciate your civility.

> (Subjugation and mistreatment of blacks by whites is and was a huge problem, but it is not causing the crime problem, and it is not helping anyone to pretend that it is).

Centuries of subjugation and mistreatment has led to a socio-economic underclass. This is _fact_. There is plenty of documentation. Even though things are getting better the fact remains that this is the cause of the crime problem.

Rather than attribute the obvious source to the problem you have said:

1) That black on white crime is racially motivated, "get whitey". You can't just say that, you can't just trot out unsubstantiated claims. I just don't believe that's true.

2) That if only blacks got their act together in the way other races have that they'd improve their lot.

3) That there are poor people or underclasses in other societies and they don't carry on the way blacks in the US do.

Or words to that effect.

For me that is not pattern matching, that _is_ prejudicial thinking. And you accuse blacks of racism! You state implicitly and explicitly that it is because of their race that the crime rates are higher and that the urban decay is worse than other places at other times. That is prejudicial thinking and we can leave morality out of it. My concern in analysing the language and the logic that you use is if you are using the same standards for every group of people. I clearly see that you are not. That means you are exhibiting bias, that your thinking is prejudicial. You've learnt this, you need to unlearn it. I know it's not easy to confront that which is within us that is biased and prejudicial but there you go.

Tell you what. You point me towards the stats and the literature (not the anecdotes!) that have led you to these conclusions and we'll explore this topic together.

Re: The Data of Hate

#114

Post by igravious » Tue, Jul 15, 2014, 9:02 AM UTC

henrymercer wrote: post #106

Intermernet wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as you call the problem "Black on white" crime, you're showing your true colours. The problem isn't "Blacks" or "Whites", it's those who discriminate between them.

Except that every example I pulled from Philadelphia, a city where I would like to live, but where I do not think I can raise a family safely, was black-on-white or black-on-asian crime. Read the links I included, this is a racial issue. From an analytical standpoint, the crime is best understood as an ethnic conflict, just as Palestinian-versus-Jewish or Jewish-versus-Palestinian violence or Hutu-versus-Tutsi violen…

Except that I'm sure there is lots of black-on-black crime as well.

In short, there is lots of black crime.

Why?

Because of the shitty socio-economic position they find themselves in due to centuries of subjugation, institutional and social mistreatment. And that happened because of their race. In that way it's a racial issue. White racism. Blacks were for a long time not even classed as human, which is a classic dehumanizing tactic used to view the other as an object to be used rather than respected.

Comparing black crime in the USA to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory or to the Belgian initiated ethnic violence in Rwanda is wrong-headed and very prejudicial thinking.

Re: The Data of Hate

#115

Post by henrymercer » Tue, Jul 15, 2014, 3:09 PM UTC

igravious wrote: post #113

henrymercer wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(c) it depends how you define racist. If you define racism as exhibiting personal animosity or prejudice to people one knows of another race, due to the color of their skin, then I am not a racist. If you define racism as identifying and pattern matching general problems that break down along ethnic and racial lines, then I am a racist. You can choose your own definition, I'll choose mine. How we define the word is n…

Henry. Thanks for taking the time to debate me on this. I appreciate your civility. > (Subjugation and mistreatment of blacks by whites is and was a huge problem, but it is not causing the crime problem, and it is not helping anyone to pretend that it is). Centuries of subjugation and mistreatment has led to a socio-economic underclass. This is _fact_. There is plenty of documentation. Even though things are getting…

Tell you what. You point me towards the stats and the literature (not the anecdotes!) that have led you to these conclusions and we'll explore this topic together.

Send me an email at henry.k.mercer at google's email service. I'll reply back this weekend with a reading list.