Ferguson conflict - What is the problem, and how to solve it?

[zapatos]

Meanwhile it is the standard in black communities.

 

I wonder why that is. In a place like Ferguson, a majority black police force is there for the taking if the majority of the citizens are willing to vote that way. Why doesn't that happen more often?

[overtone]

 

 

In a place like Ferguson, a majority black police force is there for the taking if the majority of the citizens are willing to vote that way. Why doesn't that happen more often?

It wouldn't be easy to get a majority black police force by voting - police officer is not an elected job. But a black mayor, police chief, school board, and city council rep, would be doable in a couple of years or less.

So why not? Well: Voting has only been routinely possible - difficult, still, but reasonably available if strongly motivated - for black people in places like Ferguson since around 1980 or so. There's no tradition of voting, no history of good and bad experiences to learn from, no familiarity with the bureaucracy and procedures, no familiarity with sources of information, and underneath it all less sense of place or home town - black people live where the white folks let them live, and mostly renting, not where their grandparents found opportunity and put down roots, in much of the US and Ferguson in particular. Government and policing and so forth has been something that other people do to them, for 250 years and counting.

 

This latest incident may tip things there - but probably not: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/08/14/ferguson_missouri_government_why_is_it_so_white.html

[Ten oz]

 

I wonder why that is. In a place like Ferguson, a majority black police force is there for the taking if the majority of the citizens are willing to vote that way. Why doesn't that happen more often?

Wondering why doesn't change the fact that it is. The pattern exists throughout the country and not only in Ferguson. Predominately black communities are most often under the leadership and supervision of people from outside the community. People who have less invested in the community. When a pattern repeats city after city, county after county, and state after state there is usually something systematic in place. If not what are you implying?

[zapatos]

Wondering why doesn't change the fact that it is.

Yes, I'm aware of that.

 

Predominately black communities are most often under the leadership and supervision of people from outside the community.

Can you give some examples of that? I'm unsure in what sense you mean. As an example the community leadership in Ferguson is voted in by Ferguson residents. Who are the 'outside' people you are talking about?

 

When a pattern repeats city after city, county after county, and state after state there is usually something systematic in place. If not what are you implying?

I'm implying that the people in many predominately black communities could have black leadership and black police officers if they voted in black leaders who would ensure the community has black police officers.

 

...there is usually something systematic in place.

Are you implying that there are some sort of rules or regulations that are keeping blacks from going to the polls?

[Ten oz]

@ Zapatos, as has already been discussed here many police officers around the country do not live in the communities they police.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/most-police-dont-live-in-the-cities-they-serve/

 

In Oakland, Ca for example:

"Just 9 percent of Oakland's current 644 police officers actually live in Oakland, according to data provided by OPD. Adding civilian OPD staff who also live outside of Oakland, the total number of police department employees who do not reside in the city is about 785, more than 70 percent of the department's total workforce.

The city paid these non-Oakland employees roughly $126 million in salary, overtime, and benefits in the 2010-2011 fiscal year. In other words, Oakland taxpayers are exporting up to 86 percent of OPD's payroll, a huge sum of money, to surrounding suburbs."

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/the-high-costs-of-outsourcing-policeandnbsp/Content?oid=3306199&showFullText=true

 

Government jobs are stable good paying jobs. When hundreds of millions of dollars leave a city it has a depressing effect on the city's economy. That $126 million in police salary for example if kept local would being supporting restaurants, stores, real estate, and etc. Instead it just leaves and local industry suffers which in turn hurts the revenue of the city itself since the city gets its revenue from taxes and fees. This impacts schools and other local services.

"OAKLAND -- A new study on teacher pay puts this city's public schools close to the bottom of the 125 largest school districts nationwide when you consider each city's cost of living.

The study released Wednesday by the Washington, D.C.- based National Council on Teacher Quality ranks Oakland's school district 121st out of 125 when comparing starting salary, the salary at the end of a teacher's career and lifetime earnings over 30 years."

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_27053533/oakland-teacher-pay-among-lowest-u-s

 

So why don't lower income people get out there and vote? Why don't people in Ferguson just vote in an all local everything? The answer is not that straight forward. The poorer a person is the less likely they are to vote. Regardless of race or location. This is not something unique to Ferguson. It is systematic throughout the country. However the numbers are improving. More poorer people vote today. Your question has a long history that is not fully being addressed nor is the fact that it has been improving. It is better than it's been and you are asking why it isn't even better still.

"Turnout rates among low-income Americans have increased in recent years, with these citizens voting at higher levels in recent elections than at any since the mid-1960s, as shown in Figure 2."

http://www.demos.org/data-byte/voter-turnout-income-2008-us-presidential-election

[DimaMazin]

 

No. They have police attention imposed upon them. If they are black and in certain places in America, the police attention is oppressive and violent.

 

White stockbrokers on Wall Street, heavily involved in the cocaine trade and prostitution and gambling as well as theft and fraud and swindle and embezzlements of various kinds, have not been subjected to stop and frisk policies or no-knock swat team home entries, for example. The police have never, regardless of known criminal presence and crime level, cruised Wall Street or raided the commuter train stops with vans, seized however many likely criminals or observed criminals (jaywalking, obstructing the sidewalk, littering, smoking in an entry, etc) matched the number of officers who needed an arrest for their records, and arraigned them in courts where their bail was set at just enough to keep them from meeting it as a pressure to plead guilty.

 

 

And so the police protects interests of big criminals. Do you think the oppress of blacks is a benefit for the big criminals?

[overtone]

And so the police protects interests of big criminals.

No, I posted that the police do not oppress and abuse white people as they do black people, in the US. There is no white community that is treated by its police force as the black neighborhoods of New York and other big cities are treated, or the black neighborhoods of Ferguson are treated (too small to have black neighborhoods? don't be silly, of course it has black neighborhoods - in the former slave States universally, and most other regions commonly, geographic areas with black and white people in them have a black neighborhood. I'll bet you can find a town in Missouri with ten houses in it and three of them are the black neighborhood - on the other side of a road, across the tracks, a little ways apart, etc).

 

Do you think the oppress of blacks is a benefit for the big criminals?

I don't think it's a net benefit for anybody. It's one of those time-honored human follies that keep us all from having nice things.

 

 

 

 

The poorer a person is the less likely they are to vote. Regardless of race or location. This is not something unique to Ferguson. It is systematic throughout the country.

The extra burden of race and its effects on black voting are pretty significant, though. If the poor black people of Ferguson, MO, voted in the same percentage as the poor white people of Faribault, MN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faribault,_Minnesota) they'd have a different government than they do, altogether.

 

Nobody ever lynched anyone anywhere near Faribault for attempting to get poor white people to register as voters. Never happened. Was never even threatened. That makes a difference.

Edited December 30, 2014 by overtone

[Ten oz]

No, I posted that the police do not oppress and abuse white people as they do black people, in the US. There is no white community that is treated by its police force as the black neighborhoods of New York and other big cities are treated, or the black neighborhoods of Ferguson are treated (too small to have black neighborhoods? don't be silly, of course it has black neighborhoods - in the former slave States universally, and most other regions commonly, geographic areas with black and white people in them have a black neighborhood. I'll bet you can find a town in Missouri with ten houses in it and three of them are the black neighborhood - on the other side of a road, across the tracks, a little ways apart, etc).

 

I don't think it's a net benefit for anybody. It's one of those time-honored human follies that keep us all from having nice things.

 

 

 

 

The extra burden of race and its effects on black voting are pretty significant, though. If the poor black people of Ferguson, MO, voted in the same percentage as the poor white people of Faribault, MN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faribault,_Minnesota) they'd have a different government than they do, altogether.

 

Nobody ever lynched anyone anywhere near Faribault for attempting to get poor white people to register as voters. Never happened. Was never even threatened. That makes a difference.

Of course. My point was that it isn't a problem specific to Ferguson. It is also improving with time. So any argument that it such be better and they (Ferguson) should already have this, that, or the other is ignoring history.

[MigL]

Nice statistics in your post #305 Tenoz.

So poor peple are less likely to vote regardless of race.

Maybe because they are working two jobs or loitering in the streets. It doesn't matter.

It gives others opportunity to set oppressive agenda.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

Sorry typing on my phone. At a party but could not resist answering

Happy New Year

Edited January 1, 2015 by MigL

[overtone]

So poor peple are less likely to vote regardless of race

That's not true - poor people of every race are less likely to vote, but not regardless of race. Race makes a big difference in who votes, especially at lower income levels.

 

Black people who are poor are less likely to vote than white people who are poor, and one reason may be they were and are prevented or discouraged from voting in various ways (such as beating them to death and hanging their castrated bodies from trees, or contriving biased examinations to exclude them, or manipulating the locations and hours and functioning machinery of polling places frequented by black voters, and the like). Voter intimidation and suppression is one of the means by which white people in some regions of the US have oppressed black people, and excluded them from political power, and installed government by and largely for white people in their communities. This continues today - witness the voting registry irregularities and machine function oddities and vote count problems in Florida in 2000, the voting registration oddities and machine availability irregularities and vote count problems in Ohio in 2004, the fraudulent persecution of people attempting to increase black voter registration nationwide in 2008, and the racial focus of the voter ID movement in 2012.

Edited January 1, 2015 by overtone

[Ten oz]

Nice statistics in your post #305 Tenoz.

So poor peple are less likely to vote regardless of race.

Maybe because they are working two jobs or loitering in the streets. It doesn't matter.

It gives others opportunity to set oppressive agenda.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

Sorry typing on my phone. At a party but could not resist answering

Happy New Year

When something systematically effects millions of people I believe arguing for person responsibility rather than institutional change is both cynical and futile.

[zapatos]

When something systematically effects millions of people I believe arguing for person responsibility rather than institutional change is both cynical and futile.

I think arguing for one but not both is cynical and futile. Everyone should accept responsibility for themselves, and should help to ensure the institution is fair to all.

[Ten oz]

I think arguing for one but not both is cynical and futile. Everyone should accept responsibility for themselves, and should help to ensure the institution is fair to all.

If I managed an amusement park and day after day month after month across different demographics my park had a problem with people urinating on the landscaping rather than properly locating a restroom I would install more restrooms. Perhaps those people urinating should be more responsible. Perhaps hiring more security and installing cameras would be a successful deterrent to people urinating on the landscaping. I could spin my wheels going after people or I could just resolve the problem by adding restrooms.

Assuming that all people are equal there is going to be a structural component in place when overwhelming groups of people behave a certain way. Governments can work to identify and resolve those structural components or endless chase their tales try to enforce personal behavior.

[zapatos]

Assuming that all people are equal there is going to be a structural component in place when overwhelming groups of people behave a certain way. Governments can work to identify and resolve those structural components or endless chase their tales try to enforce personal behavior.

Fundamental difference of opinion I guess. I don't think it is the government's responsibility to enforce personal behavior. I expect the government to make it fair. If someone has the right to vote, the ability to vote, and chooses not to vote, that is their problem, not the government's. Don't expect the government to make sure you are fairly represented if you couldn't be bothered to go to the polls yourself.

[Ten oz]

Fundamental difference of opinion I guess. I don't think it is the government's responsibility to enforce personal behavior. I expect the government to make it fair. If someone has the right to vote, the ability to vote, and chooses not to vote, that is their problem, not the government's. Don't expect the government to make sure you are fairly represented if you couldn't be bothered to go to the polls yourself.

Safe driving is a personal responsibility. Do you agree with all the government has done to make driving safer? Some people lament that the government shouldn't force them to wear seat belts while over the years different auto companies have complained about the financial burden of of installing air bags, crumple zones, shatter proof glass, and etc. The transportation department was established in the late 60's and was seen by many as just more big government that bloats spending. Yet the results have been undeniably positive. from the late 40's through the earlier 80's there was basically over 20 deaths per 100k people per year in the united states. The height running from 66' - 73' when every year saw more than 25 deaths per 100k people. Today that number has been reduce to 10 a year per 100k people. That is an impressive improvement and it was accomplished through government taking action and not via a ground swell of person responsibility.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

[zapatos]

Exactly the same. All the government regulation in the world means nothing if you don't take on the personal responsibility that comes with driving a car. Don't drive 100 mph then get mad at me when you get hurt in an accident. I refuse to accept responsibility for you if you won't accept responsibility for yourself.

[Ten oz]

Exactly the same. All the government regulation in the world means nothing if you don't take on the personal responsibility that comes with driving a car. Don't drive 100 mph then get mad at me when you get hurt in an accident. I refuse to accept responsibility for you if you won't accept responsibility for yourself.

I do not understand this response? I outlined steps the government took toward driving safety and the dramatic improvement it has had reducing vehicles deaths. The number of deaths have more than been cut in half despite an increase in the number of people on U.S. roads. Nothing in your response seems to acknowledge or comment on that. Do you agree or disagree with government action on driver safety?

 

"If someone has the right to vote, the ability to vote, and chooses not to vote, that is their problem", this is the opposite of teamwork. We are part of one country. The more people we leave behind the weaker our country is. No modern industrialized nation in the world succeeds with a government that takes an active role in education, healthcare, infrastructure, land management, safety, and etc. Humans are a cooperative species. We exceed through planning and organization. You do for you and I do for me is not how we got from caves to skyscrapers.

[zapatos]

I do not understand this response? I outlined steps the government took toward driving safety and the dramatic improvement it has had reducing vehicles deaths. The number of deaths have more than been cut in half despite an increase in the number of people on U.S. roads. Nothing in your response seems to acknowledge or comment on that.

I did acknowledge it. I said "exactly the same". In my previous post I acknowledged government responsibility, but I also said that individuals have responsibilities. This is no different.

 

It is you who is minimizing the 'personal responsibility' side of the equation. You just jumped into another example that focused on government responsibility.

 

Do you agree or disagree with government action on driver safety?

I agree with much of it.

 

"If someone has the right to vote, the ability to vote, and chooses not to vote, that is their problem", this is the opposite of teamwork.

I agree, but probably not for the reason you think it is true. If someone has the right to vote, the ability to vote, and chooses not to vote, they are choosing to not be part of the team. I can't make them be team players. That is part of their responsibility.

 

No modern industrialized nation in the world succeeds with a government that takes an active role in education, healthcare, infrastructure, land management, safety, and etc.

Never said they did.

 

The problem I find with this type of issue is that it carries a lot of emotion with it. People have a hard time seeing things from the perspective of others.

 

This site tends to lean liberal. If things are bad for blacks it is because we have mistreated them and it is our job to fix it for them.

 

Other sites tend to lean conservative. If things are bad for blacks it is because they take no personal responsibility to get a job, vote, etc.

 

From my perspective it a combination of the two. Government and individuals need to share the responsibility. It may have been institutionally hard for blacks to vote in the past due to their race, but when it comes to voting now their race rarely comes into play. If you can be organized enough to plan protests and have the time to march and rally, then you are capable of voting too.

 

If you are not able to vote because the system is getting in your way, then I am onboard and it is 'our' responsibility to fix that. But if you are able to vote but choose not to, then while you may have my sympathy that we put you in a lower socio-economic tier, I don't have much sympathy for the fact that your elected officials are still predominately white in your predominately black community.

 

On liberal sites the conservatives think I am on their side. On the conservative sites the liberals think I am on their side. But I think I am on the side of the centrists.

[Willie71]

The "it's personal responsibility" is the trump card for most people. Unless you can understand the personal experience and culture of an oppressed population, you cannot have an informed opinion. It's like asking someone to take personal responsibility for not having developed a company like Microsoft. Why haven't more people done this? It's the same level of change from middle class to CEO of a major corporation. What is wrong with you for not trying hard enough? Everyone has the same opportunity, right? Why do most stay in the same class as their parents?

 

How about the war on drugs that results in disenfranchisement because of pot? Whites tend not to get searched, arrested, charged, and receive felony convictions for pot, due to racial profiling. Once a felon, no more voting.

 

Ever hear of learned helplessness and PTSD? Very real problems.

[zapatos]

So you think the personal responsibility of voting is on a par with developing a company like Microsoft? I would have put it on a par with going grocery shopping. Just as hard and takes about the same amount of time.

 

You are exactly the kind of person I was talking about in my previous post. I do not need to understand how hard it was for blacks to vote in the '60s to expect that 50 years later they either manage to get to the polls or not complain who their representatives are.

 

It's not hard to vote. In the 2012 Presidential election a higher percentage of blacks voted than did whites.

[Willie71]

So you think the personal responsibility of voting is on a par with developing a company like Microsoft? I would have put it on a par with going grocery shopping. Just as hard and takes about the same amount of time.

 

You are exactly the kind of person I was talking about in my previous post. I do not need to understand how hard it was for blacks to vote in the '60s to expect that 50 years later they either manage to get to the polls or not complain who their representatives are.

 

It's not hard to vote. In the 2012 Presidential election a higher percentage of blacks voted than did whites.

 

 

Breaking generational norms is difficult, nearly impossible. When I started working with young offenders, I thought is was all about choice. After a few years, these kids didn't know anyone with a legit job, completed high school, or didn't have a criminal record. It was their norm. No, they didn't vote either. Never entered their mind. They were as likely to jump to the middle class as I was to develop a company like Microsoft. The stats aren't that different either. Like I said, unless you can comprehend the cultural norms, you are only applying your values to someone who does not live in your world.

[zapatos]

Like I said, unless you can comprehend the cultural norms, you are only applying your values to someone who does not live in your world.

We are not talking about them becoming someone they aren't. We are talking about someone walking down the street and casting a ballot. People vote every year. They hear about it on the news. A black President was elected. This is not some monumental shift in their paradigm.

 

Your expectations of people are too low.

[Willie71]

We are not talking about them becoming someone they aren't. We are talking about someone walking down the street and casting a ballot. People vote every year. They hear about it on the news. A black President was elected. This is not some monumental shift in their paradigm.Your expectations of people are too low.

So you started a multinational corporation recently? Do you know where to start? What is the first step? If you have never done it, don't know anyone who did it who models the behaviour for you, then you might as well be going to the moon. Just because it's simple for you, doesn't mean it even crosses other people's minds.

[Acme]

Then there is of course the Good Ol' Patriots working their tails off to put the kibosh on poor and minority voters under the guise of voter fraud which does not exist. Missouri is among the states so disposed.

 

UFO Sightings Are More Common Than Voter Fraud

The GOP says election fraud is rampant. A close look at the numbers shows there's no evidence of that.

[zapatos]

So you started a multinational corporation recently? Do you know where to start? What is the first step? If you have never done it, don't know anyone who did it who models the behaviour for you, then you might as well be going to the moon. Just because it's simple for you, doesn't mean it even crosses other people's minds.

I don't understand how you think starting a multinational corporation is in any way similar. That seems to be a ridiculous comparison. You could figure out how to vote by stopping random people in the street. Black people are neither children nor mentally defective.