Live data from Hacker News

This Is My Racism

jonathanlipps.com

21–30 of 37 posts

Re: This Is My Racism

#21
post #20

>My point is simply that living in a segregated society from early on, and the early whispered conversations about Black people as a “they”, set in motion a force very much like compound interest. Ta-Nehisi Coates' landmark Atlantic article, The Case for Reparations [1], helps explain how this segregated society came to be: > The American real-estate industry believed segregation to be a moral principle. As late as 1…

> Millions of dollars flowed from tax coffers into segregated white neighborhoods. Wait, wouldn't it be the other way around? Inflating property values would increase tax revenue. Even if they were subsidizing white home ownership they may have come out ahead. It's one of the driving forces of gentrification: if investing X gets the city X + Y in tax revenues then it's an economically sound decision.

I think the point is that there was a de facto subsidy of segregated white neighborhoods in the first instance.

Re: This Is My Racism

#22

"We’ve seen videos of innocent black citizens gunned down by the police that is supposed to protect them" Really? Where are these videos. I think I only saw one video making the rounds where this was the case. The rest was speculation and mob mentality. "Hands up Don't shoot", for instance, never happened. "We’ve seen a community devastated by a terrorist attack that can only be described as pure, premeditated evil"…

Let me first state why I disagree with you, and then why I don't think you should be downvoted. (at the time I'm writing this, parent's post is light grey.)

Time and time again, studies demonstrate that we are all a little bit racist. Another commenter pointed out that the Implicit Association Test is a nice introduction to this research. You can take a test here: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html

Unconscious discrimination is a serious source of hardship for minorities and it's important to be aware of our bias. This is what the author of the article is getting at, and he is correct in the central point.

However, we live in a culture where racists are the scum of the earth, fired from their jobs, ostracized, hated universally. You can even be fired from your job if you defend someone that's a racist [1]

Given how hated racism is in our culture right now, debate about racial issues is skewed in three ways. First, we might not take the side of the privileged in an issue because we fear we are being unconsciously racist. Second, we might not take the side of the privileged in an issue because we fear we might be called a racist, and, if not immediately fired from ours jobs, at least shunned. Finally, we might not take the side of the privileged in an issue, because even if taking their side would be technically correct, the privileged already have enough privilege, so to say, and by speaking out in favor of them we might be weakening the forces which are working hard to eliminate racism from society as much as possible.

These biases can be just as unconscious. And they obscure the truth.

Parent is also speaking out of fear. He has come to believe that acknowledging the existence of implicit racism, is the same as always siding with the minority in every case. Even in cases where the minority is clearly in the wrong.

If you value truth, this is an abomination. If you value truth enough, it's something to get extremely angry about. By heavily downvoting parent's post, you are confirming these exact fears, while ignoring the true criticism hidden within. You are turning people away from the movement to eliminate racism, or at least making them less enthusiastic. And therefore you are doing more to slow the eradication of racism than posts like parent's ever would.

Can we upvote parent for his bravery in speaking out against the bias our culture currently has? And calmly and rationally debate his concerns? That would be infinitely more convincing than the downvote button.

[1] http://www.gamerevolution.com/manifesto/turtle-rock-communit...

Re: This Is My Racism

#23
post #16
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Reasonable discourse" doesn't start with denying that racism exists in the United States. Would you mind quoting the part of his post where he says that racism doesn't exist?

Let me rephrase: the original post denies that racism exists and/or plays a significant role in some very serious recent events , such as police interaction with members of minority communities and resultant citizen deaths, police interaction during routine traffic stops, and racially motivated mass shootings. Also, they off-handedly dismiss the experiential evidence of others while tooting their own horn about their…

Then you misinterpreted what they said. The point was that white people don't get to run away from traffic stops and knock tasers out of cops hands without getting shot. But when a black guy does it it makes the cover of Time magazine because it's so racist.

Re: This Is My Racism

#24
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Millions of dollars flowed from tax coffers into segregated white neighborhoods. Wait, wouldn't it be the other way around? Inflating property values would increase tax revenue. Even if they were subsidizing white home ownership they may have come out ahead. It's one of the driving forces of gentrification: if investing X gets the city X + Y in tax revenues then it's an economically sound decision.

I think the point is that there was a de facto subsidy of segregated white neighborhoods in the first instance.

Perhaps a de facto or indirect subsidy, but the cost of moving into those neighborhoods went up while the cost of housing for those being excluded went down. It's also arguable that cities made money with these practices (it would take some work to figure out.)

So the subsidy argument falls apart. If it doesn't cost the city money overall and white people end up paying more both for housing and in taxes then the problem with redlining lies elsewhere. (I am not trying to defend redlining, by the way.)

Re: This Is My Racism

#25
post #20

>My point is simply that living in a segregated society from early on, and the early whispered conversations about Black people as a “they”, set in motion a force very much like compound interest. Ta-Nehisi Coates' landmark Atlantic article, The Case for Reparations [1], helps explain how this segregated society came to be: > The American real-estate industry believed segregation to be a moral principle. As late as 1…

> Millions of dollars flowed from tax coffers into segregated white neighborhoods. Wait, wouldn't it be the other way around? Inflating property values would increase tax revenue. Even if they were subsidizing white home ownership they may have come out ahead. It's one of the driving forces of gentrification: if investing X gets the city X + Y in tax revenues then it's an economically sound decision.

[deleted]

Re: This Is My Racism

#26
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is that there was a de facto subsidy of segregated white neighborhoods in the first instance.

Perhaps a de facto or indirect subsidy, but the cost of moving into those neighborhoods went up while the cost of housing for those being excluded went down. It's also arguable that cities made money with these practices (it would take some work to figure out.) So the subsidy argument falls apart. If it doesn't cost the city money overall and white people end up paying more both for housing and in taxes then the prob…

Even if the cost of moving into the neighborhood went up, the white homeowners surely also benefited from higher home equity values which they can borrow against; realized gains from selling the homes -- for them and for their heirs; better public school systems; better public facilities.

So, no I don't think the subsidy argument falls apart.

Re: This Is My Racism

#27

"We’ve seen videos of innocent black citizens gunned down by the police that is supposed to protect them" Really? Where are these videos. I think I only saw one video making the rounds where this was the case. The rest was speculation and mob mentality. "Hands up Don't shoot", for instance, never happened. "We’ve seen a community devastated by a terrorist attack that can only be described as pure, premeditated evil"…

Let me first state why I disagree with you, and then why I don't think you should be downvoted. (at the time I'm writing this, parent's post is light grey.) Time and time again, studies demonstrate that we are all a little bit racist. Another commenter pointed out that the Implicit Association Test is a nice introduction to this research. You can take a test here: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html…

GP post uses personal experience, but fails to understand that being white is a crucial detail. "Police are racist" isn't persuasively countered by "I'm white. They treat me okay". This is a point GP has made before. "Them black fellas would be fine if they weren't so uppity" is, not surprisingly, a touchy viewpoint.

(PaulHaugis does make some good points about lynchmods and bullying and it's weird that those posts get so heavily downvoted.)

Re: This Is My Racism

#28
post #23
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me rephrase: the original post denies that racism exists and/or plays a significant role in some very serious recent events , such as police interaction with members of minority communities and resultant citizen deaths, police interaction during routine traffic stops, and racially motivated mass shootings. Also, they off-handedly dismiss the experiential evidence of others while tooting their own horn about their…

Then you misinterpreted what they said. The point was that white people don't get to run away from traffic stops and knock tasers out of cops hands without getting shot. But when a black guy does it it makes the cover of Time magazine because it's so racist.

>Young black males in recent years were at a far greater risk of being shot dead by police than their white counterparts – 21 times greater i, according to a ProPublica analysis of federally collected data on fatal police shootings.

The 1,217 deadly police shootings from 2010 to 2012 captured in the federal data show that blacks, age 15 to 19, were killed at a rate of 31.17 per million, while just 1.47 per million white males in that age range died at the hands of police.

One way of appreciating that stark disparity, ProPublica's analysis shows, is to calculate how many more whites over those three years would have had to have been killed for them to have been at equal risk. The number is jarring – 185, more than one per week.

ProPublica's risk analysis on young males killed by police certainly seems to support what has been an article of faith in the African American community for decades: Blacks are being killed at disturbing rates when set against the rest of the American population.

Our examination involved detailed accounts of more than 12,000 police homicides stretching from 1980 to 2012 contained in the FBI's Supplementary Homicide Report. The data, annually self-reported by hundreds of police departments across the country, confirms some assumptions, runs counter to others, and adds nuance to a wide range of questions about the use of deadly police force.

Colin Loftin, University at Albany professor and co-director of the Violence Research Group, said the FBI data is a minimum count of homicides by police, and that it is impossible to precisely measure what puts people at risk of homicide by police without more and better records. Still, what the data shows about the race of victims and officers, and the circumstances of killings, are "certainly relevant," Loftin said.

"No question, there are all kinds of racial disparities across our criminal justice system," he said. "This is one example."

http://www.propublica.org/article/deadly-force-in-black-and-...

Re: This Is My Racism

#29
post #19
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything seems large when viewed under a microscope.

I'm guessing this is a criticism? Well, it's a faulty one: much like scientists deepened the field of biology by looking both under a microscope and at the macro-scale (population studies, etc.), we can improve society for all people involved by both looking at micro-interactions (individual traffic stops) and macro-interactions (social forces and policies).

In another comment someone listed three micro-interactions [0] as evidence of a media narrative. So I'll provide three micro-interactions.

Dillon Taylor, Gilbert Collar, Christopher Roupe.

My criticism is about placing small, isolated incidents under a microscope. A seemingly large amount of evidence gets national media coverage - so it appears to be a bigger problem than it is. Ebola fear-mongering is a good example of that. There are local pandemics of much more immediate danger that receive far less coverage for far less time than ebola did.

It's confirmation bias at best and media propaganda at worst. The media is a business, people seem to forget that. They have no issues towing lines if it brings in more revenue. That also means they'll tug political ideologies that align closely with their viewers.

I also have no issue admitting that a problem likely does exist. But it's much smaller than the media would have you believe: they just put it under a microscope. So to you, it seems much larger. That's the problem with microscopes.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9971212

Re: This Is My Racism

#30
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a de facto or indirect subsidy, but the cost of moving into those neighborhoods went up while the cost of housing for those being excluded went down. It's also arguable that cities made money with these practices (it would take some work to figure out.) So the subsidy argument falls apart. If it doesn't cost the city money overall and white people end up paying more both for housing and in taxes then the prob…

Even if the cost of moving into the neighborhood went up, the white homeowners surely also benefited from higher home equity values which they can borrow against; realized gains from selling the homes -- for them and for their heirs; better public school systems; better public facilities. So, no I don't think the subsidy argument falls apart.

Only if the market goes up enough vs the other neighborhoods and what would have happened. Which maybe you can argue it does. I'm not racist enough to believe that the presence of people with black skin is that detrimental to property values. It seems clear that redlining is about class more than race.

You still have the problem that subsidies are generally thought to cost money. If redlining makes the city money it goes from "this is evil and doesn't work economically" to "this is evil but it makes money."

Post reply on HN