Physical Revue says "Whiteboards are Racist"

[iNow]

4 hours ago, Intoscience said:

stop seeing people as black or white".  <…> to eliminate a problem completely, one must cease using mechanisms which may inadvertently compound the problems even further 

I suspect nearly all of us agree that is an idealized final state, but what you and a handful of others seem to be suggesting is that dealing with this situation requires us to choose one or the the other as if they’re mutually exclusive.

My and many others stance is simply that this either/or framing of the question is shortsighted and misguided since we very clearly can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time on this. We can strive toward both in parallel.

It’s not either/or, it’s both/and.

You continue focusing on stopping new future injuries and wounds which clearly nobody disagrees with, but that’s only half the picture. You seem to be ignoring the need to also heal existing wounds previously inflicted in the past.

Stopping new cuts and sociopolitical insults is surely is a very good thing, but it it is an insufficient remedy on its own. Doing so in isolation won’t magically root out the infection and puss and rot and disease caused by existing past injuries… and (perhaps I misread you, but) you appear largely unwilling to even consider the appropriateness of healing those other existing injuries as a required parallel step… so the impasse persists due to some fictional narrative that the healing is itself adding to the injury. 

4 hours ago, Jez said:

In my opinion;

A member of a group that has not personally experienced racial injustice (even if other members of the group have) needs no reparations.

The systemic nature of the injustice means by definition that group members experienced it, even if they happen to have persevered and found a positive path through it. 

There’s a famous quote attributed to dancer Ginger Rogers saying that she had to do everything that her partner Fred Astaire did, but ‘backwards and in high heels’ and therefore with extra difficulty.

The same applies here. Just because some managed to rise to the asymmetric challenges and additional burdens posed to them based solely on the melanin content of their dermal layers doesn’t mean the challenges themselves didn’t exist or weren’t embedded in thousands of often invisible ways into daily life and socioeconomic encounters (as already repeatedly highlighted and evidenced right here in this very thread). 

But sure. Keep us all talking in circles so we waste our time correcting your misguided impressions as a non-ally in this fight instead of spending time focusing on the real work of making things better for everyone. 

Edited June 14, 2023 by iNow

[Jez]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

I suspect nearly all of us agree that is an idealized final state, but what you and a handful of others seem to be suggesting is that dealing with this situation requires us to choose one or the the other as if they’re mutually exclusive.

My and many others stance is simply that this either/or framing of the question is shortsighted and misguided since we very clearly can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time on this. We can strive toward both in parallel.

 

FWIW, I asked specifically a while back if we were talking about past issues requiring special steps, or if we are talking about measures today, and if so then what inequalities remain?

I was told it was the past we were talking about, and the example given was 'redlining'. So the subject matter of any present injustices has not been a part of anything I have discussed since page 11, or whenever I asked and it was answered.

If you think there are injustices today that require action, I am sure there are, but if so what, and what do you think is to be done about them 'in parallel'? 

Lots of on-going 'we need to do something', no-one actually describing any 'somethings'.

What?

 

1 hour ago, iNow said:

The systemic nature of the injustice means by definition that group members experienced it, even if they happen to have persevered and found a positive path through it. 

There’s a famous quote attributed to dancer Ginger Rogers saying that she had to do everything that her partner Fred Astaire did, but ‘backwards and in high heels’ and therefore with extra difficulty.

There are two, potentially controversial, things to say in response to that;

1) It's clear that society as a whole has suffered the outcomes of racial prejudice, it is like a poison that has damaged more lives than just those in the groups who are the subject of the prejudice, and

2) Lots of minorities and disadvantaged 'white' folk also have to tap dance in high heels, you are not clarifying why that sort of comment applies to the 'black group' only. 

Without clarifications on why these comments of yours need to be acted on first and with priority to the 'black groups' it is difficult to comprehend what the solutions would be.

It's even more difficult to comprehend when no-one's yet actually proposed any solutions, other than the existing legal routes and the commissions already set up to probe into these issues.

[iNow]

I’m sorry to hear you’re experiencing comprehension challenges. 

[Jez]

7 minutes ago, iNow said:

I’m sorry to hear you’re experiencing comprehension challenges. 

In what regard?

The question I asked was clear, as was the reply;-

 

Edited June 14, 2023 by Jez

[Intoscience]

21 hours ago, iNow said:

You seem to be ignoring the need to also heal existing wounds previously inflicted in the past.

 

21 hours ago, iNow said:

and (perhaps I misread you, but) you appear largely unwilling to even consider the appropriateness of healing those other existing injuries as a required parallel step… so the impasse persists due to some fictional narrative that the healing is itself adding to the injury. 

On the contrary, this is not what I'm saying.

I fully  agree past injuries and existing wounds need to be dealt with. My argument is around the suitability of the prescribed treatment. What bandages are to be used, what medicine needs to be prescribed and what post treatment should follow to continue to mend old wounds, rid out infections and ensure no more are inflicted.  

I see your argument as - one medicine, one band aid, one treatment fix all aimed specifically at one group. Which may inadvertently cause further infections not just for those who have old/existing wounds, but also for those which may become susceptible to future ones as result. 

In my opinion (maybe idealistic) would be an more considered approach aimed at all wounded both past and present, but also any possible side effects of the treatment. Ideally by using the correct band aid for each individual wound, using medicine that is not likely to cause side effects for the patient or others. Followed by treatment which vaccinates against or better still eradicates this infectious disease for all people (racism).  

Edited June 15, 2023 by Intoscience
spelling

[dimreepr]

22 hours ago, Jez said:

Yes, we covered that over several posts.

The example presented to me was redlining, and I showed that the legal system is appropriate to deal with that, there are already several dozen cases that have run in court and it looks like the "reparations" have totalled some several billion so far.

So, can you please now explain your routes which, as far as I can tell, are not going to include any legal means to enforce as you don't trust your own laws.

So, what is the solution, a dictatorship? I'm not following what possible solution you could propose that can be logically tested if you say that laws aren't a solution and the constitution needs amending.

Please spill the beans on your solutions. I've asked about a dozen times or more, and always get back a question about my thinking (which I always answer).

Way to miss the point:

Firstly, have you been a victim of the system, in the context of this thread? Secondly your solution is to keep the status quo, that's been designed by the elite, to make THE MINIMUM amount of contribution to society, across the board.

The very fact that you consider that to be a solution to the problem, means you have never felt a jack boot/knee on your throat.

My solution is to think very hard about that and say a little mantra "there but for the grace of <insert belief> goes I" and then think about how high investment in society across the board even helps you (the elite), so you're being kind to yourself, even if you have no intention of being kind to them; and when you've done all that thinking, stop making excuses and vote for the guy/gall that promises to make it happen.

You're welcome to test that all ways up...

34 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

 

On the contrary, this is not what I'm saying.

I fully  agree past injuries and existing wounds need to be dealt with. My argument is around the suitability of the prescribed treatment. What bandages are to be used, what medicine needs to be prescribed and what post treatment should follow to continue to mend old wounds, rid out infections and ensure no more are inflicted.  

I see your argument as - one medicine, one band aid, one treatment fix all aimed specifically at one group. Which may inadvertently cause further infections not just for those who have old/existing wounds, but also for those which may become susceptible to future ones as result. 

In my opinion (maybe idealistic) would be an more considered approach aimed at all wounded both past and present, but also any possible side effects of the treatment. Ideally by using the correct band aid for each individual wound, using medicine that is not likely to cause side effects for the patient or others. Followed by treatment which vaccinates against or better still eradicates this infectious disease for all people (racism).  

See above, final paragraph. 

[Intoscience]

17 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

vote for the guy/gall that promises to make it happen

Good luck with that one. 

[dimreepr]

5 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

Good luck with that one. 

What we really need is a cultural revolution/ary.

Besides, are you saying you wouldn't vote for that?

[MigL]

27 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Way to miss the point:

Firstly, have you been a victim of the system, in the context of this thread? Secondly your solution is to keep the status quo, that's been designed by the elite, to make THE MINIMUM amount of contribution to society, across the board.

Way to hold others to different standards than yourself.

When have you been a victim of the 'system' in the context of this thread ????

[dimreepr]

55 minutes ago, MigL said:

Way to hold others to different standards than yourself.

When have you been a victim of the 'system' in the context of this thread ????

Well, I'm white and grew up with only one black kid in my year at school (and I was poorer than him, I had free school dinner's (one of five, in a school of over a thousand)).

That's not an excuse, it's the reason I felt sorry/empathised for him when the teacher called him a black basterd, almost daily (edit to clarify, I was from a one parent family, a white basterd, as it was, back then). 

Besides, way to miss the point of a point well missed. 

Edited June 15, 2023 by dimreepr

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Intoscience said:

y argument is around the suitability of the prescribed treatment. What bandages are to be used, what medicine needs to be prescribed and what post treatment should follow to continue to mend old wounds, rid out infections and ensure no more are inflicted.  

I see your argument as - one medicine, one band aid, one treatment fix all aimed specifically at one group.

I appreciate you clarifying. Based on this, we seem to largely be on the same page, IMO. I'm not advocating a specific response at this point, only that a response is both needed and appropriate. I'm flexible on the details of how it gets implemented, but rigid on the idea that nothing should be done (if that makes sense).

With that said, the more situationally specific and complex we make this, the less likely it is to get done and achieve the impact we desire, so I'm inclined to accept good enough over perfect.

[MigL]

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Besides, way to miss the point of a point well missed. 

What exactly, sis I miss ?

You implied Jez cannot possibly understand the situation because he never experienced injustices, Yet you have no idea whether Jez had a difficult upbringing, or even if he is a visible minority.
You just jumped to conclusions based on your misinterpreting of his posts.
From your posting history I get the impression that you hold all of society responsible for your growing up poor, yet you are satisfied with your lot in life, and certainly aren't helping yourself.

Try not to be so judgmental of others lest you be similarly judged.

[Intoscience]

15 hours ago, iNow said:

I appreciate you clarifying. Based on this, we seem to largely be on the same page, IMO. I'm not advocating a specific response at this point, only that a response is both needed and appropriate. I'm flexible on the details of how it gets implemented, but rigid on the idea that nothing should be done (if that makes sense).

With that said, the more situationally specific and complex we make this, the less likely it is to get done and achieve the impact we desire, so I'm inclined to accept good enough over perfect.

Yes, I think we (all of us) want people to be treated equally and injustices compensated for.  I tend to be in the school of thought of make it simple where possible. So yeah, I'd agree something maybe better than nothing. 

But to rid the system of racism the system has to stop discriminating by colour or race. Whether this is achievable in reality and still able to get satisfactory results begs the question. Honestly I doubt it, there will always be victims of change. 

17 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Besides, are you saying you wouldn't vote for that?

Yeah I'd vote for it sure. But in my experience people (politicians) who claim to give you the world end up selling you a rock to chuck instead.  

Edited June 16, 2023 by Intoscience
spelling

[dimreepr]

22 hours ago, MigL said:

You implied Jez cannot possibly understand the situation because he never experienced injustices,

Nope, read again I asked @Jez to think about it as if he was a victim.

8 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Yeah I'd vote for it sure. But in my experience people (politicians) who claim to give you the world end up selling you a rock to chuck instead.

Mine too, but I'm not asking for nirvana/utopia (it doesn't exist), just somewhere on the road to it; until the advent of the revolutionary, we use our critical thinking skills, to sort the wheat from the chaff; baby steps will do, until we're ready to take a giant leap.

 

“Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one.” – Marcus Aurelius.

22 hours ago, MigL said:

From your posting history I get the impression that you hold all of society responsible for your growing up poor, yet you are satisfied with your lot in life, and certainly aren't helping yourself.

Not at all, I'm grateful for the society, I grew up in, that gave me shelter and free school meals (despite my being a basterd); what I hold society responsible for, is the gradual dimunition of that society to the point that even a hard working nurse, employed by society, is neither guaranteed shelter or a meal and is expected to pay for their education.

Besides, why shouldn't I be satisfied with my lot? Wishing for more is like playing the lottery, a voluntary tax on the overly optimistic. 😉 

Edited June 16, 2023 by dimreepr

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Besides, why shouldn't I be satisfied with my lot? Wishing for more is like playing the lottery, a voluntary tax on the overly optimistic. 😉 

"It's not having what you want
It's wanting what you've got" - Sheryl Crow

[iNow]

9 hours ago, Intoscience said:

But to rid the system of racism the system has to stop discriminating by colour or race. Whether this is achievable in reality and still able to get satisfactory results begs the question. Honestly I doubt it, there will always be victims of change. 

While this would surely be an ideal outcome, I personally classify it as extremely unrealistic and a bit pie in the sky so don't anchor myself to this as the core goal. It's a guiding lightpost, but not a destination IMO. 

Better. Not perfect. Now, not later. That's what's needed here... continued steps toward healing past injuries while IN PARALLEL striving toward avoidance of new injury. 

[zapatos]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

Better. Not perfect. Now, not later. That's what's needed here... continued steps toward healing past injuries while IN PARALLEL striving toward avoidance of new injury. 

Well said. I know not everyone thinks like me, but I'm still surprised and dumbfounded when I see pushback against what seems to be such a reasonable proposition.

[Phi for All]

10 hours ago, Intoscience said:

But to rid the system of racism the system has to stop discriminating by colour or race. Whether this is achievable in reality and still able to get satisfactory results begs the question. Honestly I doubt it, there will always be victims of change.

One thing that doesn't help is enforcing some kind of moral superiority by virtue of being "colorblind". Thinking that we can ignore color is a specious stance, one that sounds noble and virtuous, but is not only impossible but also detrimental to society as a whole. Skin color isn't something to be ignored, it's something to be accepted as normal rather than different or dangerous. 

[MigL]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

Thinking that we can ignore color is a specious stance, one that sounds noble and virtuous, but is not only impossible but also detrimental to society as a whole.

I could easily agree with such an innocent sentiment  if I hadn't heard it so many times from racists.

Not implying you are one, but simply, that a racist could offer up the same exact sentiment.
( with a totally different meaning and conclusion )

 

When people become our friends we tend to lose descriptors of color and race.
I don't say I haveblack, or Jamaican friends, nor Indian, Chinese, Cambodian, Korean or Middle Eastern friends.
They are simply my friends.

Funny how when you get to know people for who they actually are, it suddenly becomes possible to ignore color and race.
Maybe it's not such a specious stance as you imagine.

Edited June 16, 2023 by MigL

[TheVat]

After staying off the thread for ten pages, looking in I'm sorry to see the same truism in play, that reversing discrimination is equivalent to discrimination.  

I think this truism is what messed up AA here in the States.  In the Johnson admin, it was straightforwardly defined as reversing racial discrimination.  Then, to fend off all the right-wing salvos of "this is more discrimination" most colleges and businesses shifted to diversity as the core goal of AA.  The notion of dorms populated with people from all classes and ethnicities had that nice anodyne feel that appeased moderate conservatives. (at least, for a while)

 

 

Edited June 16, 2023 by TheVat
dpvje

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

After staying off the thread for ten pages, looking in I'm sorry to see the same truism in play, that reversing discrimination is equivalent to discrimination.  

I think this is attributable to willful bad arithmetic. Folks that feel this way see reparation/AA as the proverbial two wrongs trying to make a right, rather than a wrong and a right trying to make things even again. They can't tell you why reparations are wrong except through circular arguments about them being racist.

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

I think this is attributable to willful bad arithmetic. Folks that feel this way see reparation/AA as the proverbial two wrongs trying to make a right, rather than a wrong and a right trying to make things even again. They can't tell you why reparations are wrong except through circular arguments about them being racist.

'Reparations' - it's as vague 'woke'. Until you put meat on the bones and put numbers on it, it's just air. You can't fix spilt milk, you can only wipe it up and figure out why it happened.  The milk has gone, just like all those historical slaves, Jim Crows victims are dead... kaput. their experience cannot be felt by people alive today in the US. 

As I said to a court head bailiff once, chasing him for debt: " Am I responsible for my brothers actions?" "Of course not" That was the end of that.

It is reminiscent of what some countries routinely do, chasing a family member instead of chasing the person that's absconded/committed crimes. These are generally authoritarian regimes.

[Phi for All]

9 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

'Reparations' - it's as vague 'woke'. Until you put meat on the bones and put numbers on it, it's just air.

It's traditionally been difficult to talk numbers with people who dismiss reparations out of hand as being discriminatory. Making amends for something done wrong is hardly vague, and in some of these situations (redlining for example), the meat and bones are right there to calculate, so I don't understand why you think it's vague (probably just because I haven't bothered to name numbers). Is it relevant? Is there a number where you would say "That sounds reasonable", and another number where you would say "No way, they don't deserve that much"? Why haven't you provided those numbers?

Btw, woke isn't vague at all, but like many things, I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. Americans are waking up to a great many things about ourselves lately.

17 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

You can't fix spilt milk, you can only wipe it up and figure out why it happened. 

Are you kidding me? Wiping it up is the ONLY thing you can think of?

If one kid spills the other's milk on purpose, I can take his milk away and give it to the other kid, or I can give half a glass to each. I can also pour another glass of milk, and spend some time figuring out how to keep people from maliciously spilling milk, which seems the smartest to me. 

I don't know what more to say. Your arguments seem to favor many negative elements of our society, and I'm sure many criminals would prefer not to be punished for misdeeds. This has nothing to do with your brothers and being responsible for their actions. This has to do with public responsibility in a democracy for the People. We the People are responsible for what our government does wrong.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

The milk has gone, just like all those historical slaves, Jim Crows victims are dead... kaput. their experience cannot be felt by people alive today in the US. 

We were aligned and I was right there with you until this last part.

Their experience is felt every. Single. Day. Often multiple times throughout each day. See also: Cops murdering black kids at disproportionate rates, resumes with “black sounding” names being ignored and passed over by job recruiters and head hunters, being watch like a hawk by security guards at every store at the mall, at the convenience store, the bank, everywhere just for existing or driving “while black.”

The experience CAN be and IS felt by people alive today in the US, and it’s worse in some places than others and isn’t limited to black folks or folks with ancestors in slavery. 

[StringJunky]

33 minutes ago, iNow said:

We were aligned and I was right there with you until this last part.

Their experience is felt every. Single. Day. Often multiple times throughout each day. See also: Cops murdering black kids at disproportionate rates, resumes with “black sounding” names being ignored and passed over by job recruiters and head hunters, being watch like a hawk by security guards at every store at the mall, at the convenience store, the bank, everywhere just for existing or driving “while black.”

The experience CAN be and IS felt by people alive today in the US, and it’s worse in some places than others and isn’t limited to black folks or folks with ancestors in slavery. 

Yes, these are people whose problems we can address. Address  their problems of today, not half a century ago, a century ago etc. The long term cure is to get more ethnic representation where it is absent, so that their representative can present their case and with a better chance of being treated equally.

I read an interesting article on immigration where the problem seemed to be inadequate political represention in the seat of power in the immigrant's country of choice. The article was about Palestinian representation in the US Congress relative to the Israelis. The Israelis are represented by hundreds of Pro-Israel lobbyists and hundreds of millions sitting in Israel biased/friendly US institutions. Relatively, the Palestinians have very little in that direction and are beholden to  essentially unpredictable charitable whims by benefactors. you can't run a concerted political campaign on inconsistently applied  charity. Israel has more than enough grease to get access to. US politicians.

I think here needs to be a fundamental rethink about lobbying protocols in Congress and limiting how much facetime and 'grease' they are allowed to apply to the upper and lower house members.

Political parties are limited in how much can be spent towards an election. This is a prime candidate for applying the same standards of conduct. I think it is antithetical to the principle of a fair democracy that those with means can completely override those less fortunate. Sound familiar?

Edited June 17, 2023 by StringJunky