Physical Revue says "Whiteboards are Racist"

[Jez]

43 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Maybe you should read the thread, before you, wrongly, reduce it to nensense... 😉

No idea what nensense is.

But I can read the thread title and the OP and I was reacting to that.

If it has gone off-topic in the meantime, you can thank me later for getting it back on track.

A discussion on reparations, I see, are way off topic to the OP. 'Everyone' has both suffered and benefitted from slavery of the past. Still goes on extensively in Africa, maybe focus efforts on stopping it first than worrying about the past, for now?

Edited June 5, 2023 by Jez

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Jez said:

No idea what nensense is.

But I can read the thread title and the OP and I was reacting to that.

If it has gone off-topic in the meantime, you can thank me later for getting it back on track.

 

You think you can dismiss 6 pages of, mostly, well considered reactions to the developing thread, without reading it, is just arrogant nonsense; it's like reading the synopsis of 'war and peace' and saying "it was him".

Please read the thread, before your next reply... 🙏

[MigL]

Being the OP, maybe I should explain the intent of the thread title.

I have said this a couple of times before.
When you go looking for racism, you always find it; even when it isn't actually there, such as with the cases of whiteboards, and blackboards.

[Phi for All]

9 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Ok I see your point, our arguments are aligning a little now. I'm a firm believer in people paying theirs dues, so no argument there.

However, I was interpreting your argument as (based on your analogy), a bully is stealing your child's lunch money and because the said bully is from a specific group all the people in that group must be bullies so they should all be punished and pay for the bully's crime.

This just seems like such a leap, like you're purposely obfuscating the point. The bully belongs to a group that should be punished?! Jesus. I'm giving up on analogy.

I'll put it plainly. White people have benefitted from discrimination against people of color, and now that it's being pointed out, some white folks agree that it was wrong but think merely fixing the laws or behavior is enough, and I don't agree. Lifting the oppression is one thing, a good thing, but repairing the damage is also a crucial part of righting wrongs.

9 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Yet the constitution built by the bullies and oppressors is held in such high esteem in the US even today. Those people are long gone, dead and buried.  

You consider the founding fathers "bullies and oppressors"? Have you expressed this before and I just missed it?

The founding fathers were pretty clear about the need to constantly update (amend) the US Constitution. They gave us the mechanism of the Continental Congress, and many folks think we should finally convene the third one.

Modern conservatives/evangelicals pretty much cherry-pick what they want from the original document, like assuming the 1st Amendment protections for religion are only for Christians. They focus on the 2nd Amendment while ignoring the 6th, 8th and 13th, something they also do with their Bible. Then they claim both documents and their interpretations of them are sacred and can't be changed. I don't blame the founding fathers for the way we've allowed some folks to push their perspectives on us all.

[CharonY]

41 minutes ago, MigL said:

Being the OP, maybe I should explain the intent of the thread title.

I have said this a couple of times before.
When you go looking for racism, you always find it; even when it isn't actually there, such as with the cases of whiteboards, and blackboards.

And ironically this is not what the original paper was about, suggesting  that it is even easier to find articles complaining about non-existent complains of racism. I.e. saying that folks complain too much about racism apparently makes good click bait (not to mention that it has a l9ng tradition).

[iNow]

On 5/15/2023 at 11:00 PM, iNow said:

It’s far easier to manufacture rage and get our Italian friends riled up than to properly represent what the paper actually says. 

Tucker Carlson, and right wing media more broadly, are particularly good at removing context, misrepresenting things, and generating very intentional and specific emotional responses in audiences. 

 

[CharonY]

Not to mention that this is common distraction used since, well, probably ever. "Look there are folks doing silly things in the name of *thing*, therefore let's disregard *thing*". 

It is unfortunately an efficient way to handwave away structural issues. The interesting bit is that I am hearing the same thing since the 80s and at the same time folks are claiming every time that in the last decade or so the issues are fixed and a ton of progress has been made. However, if things were already fixed, how the heck did they perceive progress?

[MigL]

You will notice, CharonY, that nowhere did I say racism is 'fixed'.

Racism is very apparent, especially in the Southern States, at European soccer matches, in Canada with the indigenous, and even in places like India/China.

That doesn't mean that there aren't cases where'racism' is perceived, usually by a white person, where a black person has no such perception.

And it also doesn't mean there arent cases of fake 'racism'; Jussie Smollet comes to mind.

Of course, there arequantifiable injustices ( such as witholding loans ), but the problem with perceived injustices is that they exist in the mind of the perceiver; sometimes not in the real world.
That's why I say, if you look hard enough you can find any perceived injustice.
 

Edited June 5, 2023 by MigL

[iNow]

13 minutes ago, MigL said:

if you look hard enough you can find any perceived injustice.

Absolutely true, yet here the injustice can be found even with easy looking, a mere passing glance confirms it’s there, strain and effort not required. The injustice under discussion here persists even when our eyes are closed, and is across generations. 

Edited June 5, 2023 by iNow

[Intoscience]

15 hours ago, Phi for All said:

This just seems like such a leap, like you're purposely obfuscating the point. The bully belongs to a group that should be punished?! Jesus. I'm giving up on analogy

I was just stating that this was how I had originally interpreted your argument and that now I

 

15 hours ago, Phi for All said:

I'll put it plainly. White people have benefitted from discrimination against people of color, and now that it's being pointed out, some white folks agree that it was wrong but think merely fixing the laws or behavior is enough, and I don't agree. Lifting the oppression is one thing, a good thing, but repairing the damage is also a crucial part of righting wrongs

see your point and agree with it in most part. 

There is no purposeful obfuscating, I had mis-interpreted your original argument and ran with this interpretation until it later dawned on me. 

17 hours ago, Jez said:

'Everyone' has both suffered and benefitted from slavery of the past. Still goes on extensively in Africa, maybe focus efforts on stopping it first than worrying about the past, for now?

The point that's in discussion at the moment is around retribution. We all agree that stopping needs to be done. What we may not agree on is what/whether there should be some form of re-payment and if/how this should be conducted. 

10 hours ago, iNow said:

Absolutely true, yet here the injustice can be found even with easy looking, a mere passing glance confirms it’s there, strain and effort not required. The injustice under discussion here persists even when our eyes are closed, and is across generations

I guess then it's more about the level of injustice, what is most important now. 

Edited June 6, 2023 by Intoscience
spelling

[Jez]

4 hours ago, Intoscience said:

 

The point that's in discussion at the moment is around retribution. We all agree that stopping needs to be done. What we may not agree on is what/whether there should be some form of re-payment and if/how this should be conducted. 

 

It's absurd by any measure to consider repayment 'by skin colour', and harks to the OP's proposition that if you go looking for racism as the origin of 'X', then you'll find what you are looking for. But are the 'labelling' of past injustices not merely the differences between whiteboards and blackboards? There have been black slave owners and white slaves for as long as there has been slavery, if one goes looking then one will find that too ....

Whether one can trace immoral gains through generations and equate "these dollar now" to "that dollar then", because without that level of auditability, the answer is objectively there cannot be some form of 'repayment'.

In some cases, there are families in the UK who gained from Government compensation payments for slaves at the time of abolition, because all that was recorded precisely, and in those cases one can see a direct connection between 'that compensation' and 'that house' (say) and in those cases some of those people are taking it upon themselves to accept there is a connection.

But in the general case, unless there is that sort of record, simply 'no', there can be no fair means for direct 'extraction' from one racial group to another, it is literally racist to do that.

Society as a whole is paying for issues of today rooted in the past already and has been paying for decades, and we have all gained or lost from the past and we all now are elevated by the means of social taxation and benefits.

The effects of the past on the privations of today are paid for in that way, and no social minority is untouched by some level of privation rooted in past injustices.

 

[zapatos]

46 minutes ago, Jez said:

Whether one can trace immoral gains through generations and equate "these dollar now" to "that dollar then", because without that level of auditability, the answer is objectively there cannot be some form of 'repayment'.

 

I personally know people who suffered financial harm at the hands of US government laws that only negatively impacted black people. This is not some deep, dark mystery. 

[Jez]

24 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I personally know people who suffered financial harm at the hands of US government laws that only negatively impacted black people. This is not some deep, dark mystery. 

Do you mean some past injustice, or something that remains a potential injustice.

For sure, if a past instance of an injustice is documented and can be evidenced, and someone alive has suffered an articulable financial burden (alive, or living relatives) or lives with a compensation-worthy injury, then it requires a remedy for that instance

We routinely see injustices born of prejudice, and such cases must be dealt with and remedies sought for the peaceful equity of society. But those that pay the cost of the remedies are to be those who engaged in that particular injustice, so could you clarify why you feel your point is relevant to the discussion?

[Intoscience]

33 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I personally know people who suffered financial harm at the hands of US government laws that only negatively impacted black people. This is not some deep, dark mystery. 

Past or present? where not other ethnic minorities also negatively impacted? 

I think what Jez is trying to point out is that how can those persecuted seek fair retribution, without bias. 

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Jez said:

It's absurd by any measure to consider repayment 'by skin colour', and harks to the OP's proposition that if you go looking for racism as the origin of 'X', then you'll find what you are looking for.

I think it's absurd to assume that any kind of reparation would be judged by a single factor. It's easy to dismiss a solution when it's been pinched down to worthlessness.

 

2 hours ago, Jez said:

Whether one can trace immoral gains through generations and equate "these dollar now" to "that dollar then", because without that level of auditability, the answer is objectively there cannot be some form of 'repayment'.

Cannot? And yet there are many examples where just that was done. I've given some earlier in the thread.

[dimreepr]

47 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

I think what Jez is trying to point out is that how can those persecuted seek fair retribution, without bias. 

It's easy when you think about it, science/philosophy point's at the path, it's up to you too walk it...

[Jez]

32 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Cannot? And yet there are many examples where just that was done. I've given some earlier in the thread.

You've given specific examples of what help 'could be' given, but, unless I missed it, the bit you appear to be missing is specific examples of how to determine who has been discriminated and to what degree they need that help.

If you can objectively define what being discriminated means, and that objectivity makes sense and is fair to all creeds and colours without embedding yet further racism into the metric, then I am all for society giving assistance to those people. Ultimately, that societal help comes from taxes which is heavily weighted to come from wealthy folk, any of whom may have 'whiteboards' or 'blackboards', if you see my meaning.

I cannot dispute discrimination has existed, nor even continues to, but the question of who has suffered losses from that discrimination, how, and to what magnitude of losses, has to be part of the equation.

What is your proposal to objectify that part?

[Phi for All]

2 hours ago, Jez said:

You've given specific examples of what help 'could be' given, but, unless I missed it, the bit you appear to be missing is specific examples of how to determine who has been discriminated and to what degree they need that help.

If you can objectively define what being discriminated means, and that objectivity makes sense and is fair to all creeds and colours without embedding yet further racism into the metric, then I am all for society giving assistance to those people. Ultimately, that societal help comes from taxes which is heavily weighted to come from wealthy folk, any of whom may have 'whiteboards' or 'blackboards', if you see my meaning.

I cannot dispute discrimination has existed, nor even continues to, but the question of who has suffered losses from that discrimination, how, and to what magnitude of losses, has to be part of the equation.

What is your proposal to objectify that part?

You're saying I need an objective definition of what being discriminated against really means before I can address reparations for the Tulsa Race Massacre? Wouldn't it be a LOT easier for you to try to define it in a way where it wasn't discrimination participated in by state and local government? This request for objectivity in the definitions rings hollow, like a stall tactic. Until the victim's definition matches your own, we do nothing about their claims, right? I think our approach to racism in the US needs a great deal of improvement, and your argument sounds like being content with the status quo to me.

[zapatos]

6 hours ago, Jez said:

so could you clarify why you feel your point is relevant to the discussion?

Because we are talking about reparations (among other things). Perhaps you missed part of the thread.

6 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Past or present?

They experienced an injustice in the past. They suffer a harm now.

[Jez]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

You're saying I need an objective definition of what being discriminated against really means before I can address reparations for the Tulsa Race Massacre? Wouldn't it be a LOT easier for you to try to define it in a way where it wasn't discrimination participated in by state and local government? This request for objectivity in the definitions rings hollow, like a stall tactic. Until the victim's definition matches your own, we do nothing about their claims, right? I think our approach to racism in the US needs a great deal of improvement, and your argument sounds like being content with the status quo to me.

The few surviving victims of the Tulsa Race Massacre, and the relatives of the deceased, should be empowered and assisted to bring legal cases for remedies. I whole heartedly agree and it is an ongoing injustice that this remains unresolved.

I would say, and agree with you if this is your point, it would be better for US Gov to draw up an agreement to settle the matter favourably with, as you say, adequate reparations for this having happened in the country for which they are the public authority. 

I'm unclear if you are saying this is a case for general reparations to everyone in the city/state/country/world with the same skin colour as the victims, you're not saying that are you?

This case is beyond comprehension in the blatant bloody racism that drove it. Those individuals responsible should have suffered legal consequences.

 

[zapatos]

6 hours ago, Intoscience said:

where not other ethnic minorities also negatively impacted? 

Unfortunately I do not personally know everyone who lived within the boundaries of redlined districts.

6 hours ago, Intoscience said:

I think what Jez is trying to point out is that how can those persecuted seek fair retribution, without bias. 

As far as I know people are not seeking retribution. They are seeking justice.

[Jez]

13 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Because we are talking about reparations (among other things). Perhaps you missed part of the thread.

 

I wasn't referring to that part.

I was referring to your comment that you "know people who suffered financial harm at the hands of US government laws that only negatively impacted black people".

Then I disagree that is an example for reparations. There are legal avenues for individuals with quantifiable harm as a result of unlawful behaviours, or 'unfair' applications of the law.

But maybe it is just a terminology thing, and that is what you mean by reparations, in which I agree. Of course! But it has to follow a legal avenue to test the law, I call that 'a legal case', not 'reparations'.

I would certainly enable them to seek the legal avenues, by providing legal aid funding, but what you are describing are not things for generalised reparations (which is what I would take the word to mean in this context), these are cases to put before the courts so that the law can be tested and amended where needed.

... if that is NOT done then the law will carry on being discriminatory, and that is unhelpful.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Jez

[zapatos]

4 hours ago, Jez said:

specific examples of how to determine who has been discriminated and to what degree they need that help.

A person applies for a home loan. There is only one area of a town they are allowed to live in due to their skin color. Even though they have the same income as a white man who lives in a different part of town, the white man gets the home loan but the black man does not based on where the homes they want to buy are located. 

You can check loan applications, real estate records, redlined maps, etc.

The degree to which he needs help exactly matches the degree to which he has been harmed. The details of which are settled in court.

The FHA, part of the US government, established these practices.

This is really basic stuff and only the tip of the iceberg. It is surprising you are not aware of this type of activity.

10 minutes ago, Jez said:

There are legal avenues for individuals with quantifiable harm as a result of unlawful behaviours, or 'unfair' applications of the law.

Unfortunately there are not. Sovereign immunity protects the state from being held liable for damages. 'Generalised reparations" are the only avenue.

[Jez]

50 minutes ago, zapatos said:

A person applies for a home loan. There is only one area of a town they are allowed to live in due to their skin color. Even though they have the same income as a white man who lives in a different part of town, the white man gets the home loan but the black man does not based on where the homes they want to buy are located. 

You can check loan applications, real estate records, redlined maps, etc.

The degree to which he needs help exactly matches the degree to which he has been harmed. The details of which are settled in court.

The FHA, part of the US government, established these practices.

This is really basic stuff and only the tip of the iceberg. It is surprising you are not aware of this type of activity.

I'm from the UK, does not happen here.

Are there documented cases that show this happening that I can read? How is it even allowed? How can a loan creditor even know what skin colour the applicant is?

 

50 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Unfortunately there are not. Sovereign immunity protects the state from being held liable for damages. 'Generalised reparations" are the only avenue.

We also cannot sue the Government directly but we use a process called Judicial Review, and many people receive the due remedy by following that route.

It exists in the USA too. If it does not function in the same way and achieve the same goals, then that is where the problem is. I say 'problem' not only in so far as people might be disenfranchised from seeking a remedy, but if they are then it is also a screen behind which intolerance and other discriminations are allowed to fester.

There will always be discrimination, the cure is not so much to try to stop it but to ensure there are means to confront it, challenge it, test it and seek remedies. Without that in place, then the cause is lost before it starts. With the right legal redress in place, it encourages those in power and authority to get on and do the right thing, keeps them (a bit more) honest.

If what you just put there is on the nail, then it seems to me the problem in the US is your laws. If you cannot mount appropriate Judicial Reviews, and if your laws holding Gov to account (both State and Federal) are broken then there is no point trying to figure out alternative 'band-aid' solutions you might want Gov to do to fix things. That's not the problem, if the problem is Gov itself.

Seems to me the first step is to have laws enough to be able to force Gov to deal with issues and provide remedies, not to dream up ideas for solutions that you can suggest to them that they can ignore. You do have Judicial Review, perhaps it has become broken by habitual misuse? I can't say, but from what you've said it seems that is the problem. 'Racism within the system' would exacerbate the problem, but it's not the problem because there will always be injustice. The problem seems to me (given what you just said) is that you can't use legal means to shine the cleansing rays of sunlight on such injustice.

[TheVat]

1 hour ago, Jez said:

If what you just put there is on the nail, then it seems to me the problem in the US is your laws.

In the US the problem is past laws, or past differentials in enforcement, which do generational damage.  Families are blocked from building wealth and educational status, which sets in motion a chain of effects such that later generations can't send kids to college, or muster seed money for a business or whatever.   Others have hinted at the value of reading the whole thread.  I join them.