@boiled_elephant try this. It's not meant to be patronising (given the cartoon like nature) but it might educate you a little.
Regarding the Tony Timpa thing, that's an example of poor restraint technique. You might have to put your weight and apply force on top of someone to get them under control and into a comfortable hold, but you should never keep all your weight on someone's chest as it can restrict their breathing with possible (and in this case actual) fatal consequences. You might keep some weight on someone, you can take a little restriction, but essentially they have been negligent in their actions and should probably have been prosecuted for manslaughter, or whatever the american equivalent is or at the very least been struck off for incompetence. The George Floyd case is ABSOLUTELY deliberate. The action of dragging him out of the car and pushing his knee into the neck is a method of strangling, you absolutely know what will happen when you do that, for 8 minutes!, he might has well have had his hands round his neck and yelled "die mofo N, die".
At least he hasn't seen those full-face ballistic masks that.. I want to say South Korea special forces use.
His address to the crowd the other day was inspirational, but his frustration and pain were heartbreaking to watch.
Someone who's concerned about the validity of their claims. Again, I don't think being skeptical about BLM makes one a bigot. When I look at BLM, I see political agitation, an attempt to control the narrative and silence all dissent, an attempt to drive political change through charged emotions and outside the normal political structures. That can be a good thing, but historically it is often a very damaging thing. Even if their factual claims about systemic racism are accurate, the general strategy we're seeing - mass protests, riots, stand-ins, die-ins - seems more to inflame racial tensions. When I look at American society outside of the context of current events, I don't see systemic racism. Clearly, we're meant to conclude that that's because I'm just blind to it, because privilege is invisible to the privileged, but here's the catch - I'm not in American society. I'm looking in as an outsider, my sources are just what I can see on social media, the news and academic studies. I'm looking at the same stuff you are. I see institutions at every level voicing support of BLM. I see huge numbers of people from all ethnic groups and backgrounds across the society standing in support of them. Public organisations, franchises, employers, media outlets and pundits across the US (and across the globe) are expressing solidarity and sympathy. I don't see systemic racism. Case-by-case racism, sure. We find racist individuals all the time - and every time we do, they're fired, deplatformed and socially sanctioned. (Except cops*.) It seems to me like progressivism has already happened and won. I really hate virtue signalling, because it's tacky and narcissistic, but I may as well raise my colours here, not because I feel I have to defend or sanctify myself but because it'll speed the conversation along and avoid further misunderstandings. I'm a leftist economically. I'm generally socially progressive, but skeptical about the claimed ongoing extent of various forms of bigotry, particularly systemic racism but also homophobia (sexism I think is still more prevalent). I'm very much anti-authoritarian and pro-free speech, which, yes, I know those things are considered "dog whistles" for the alt-right too, because those guys always couch their worries in terms of threats to free speech, but they're valid in themselves, and I believe in them strongly, and won't bother rebuffing further confusions that they create. The reason I'm skeptical about systemic racism is because in my own experience, in Lincolnshire, one of the most backwater, ethnically un-diverse and socially regressive regions of the UK, I have the opportunity to speak privately and confidentially to a lot of people across a wide slice of local demographics. Lots of old people, middle-aged people, retirees, benefits claimants, self-employed people, business owners, many rich and privileged, many poor and struggling. Overwhelmingly white, as per. I have encountered a few instances of homophobia. Not a majority, but certainly a few. I have encountered three people who were racist to any extent (out of hundreds at least), two seriously racist and one kinda middling. I encounter a lot of mild sexism, and a few examples of more pronounced sexism. This is within a pool of people who are mostly conservative, fairly narrow-minded - a lot of Daily Mail readers, not a lot of critical thinking, for the most part. Knee-jerk reactions and politically incorrect opinions abound, and they feel entirely comfortable sharing them with me. (It seems I'm very disarming, personable and confidential IRL, believe it or not. I know, amazes me too.) I actively seek out racism, homophobia and sexism in conversation. I Louis Theroux the **** out of it, being very inquisitive, polite and open. I'm curious to know how durable these things are in modern society, how advanced their decline is, whether they'll vanish in the future. And I almost never find even the faintest traces of racism. Most people, when it comes up, are actively anti-racist, virtue signalling to that effect without any prompting. Many people have expressed a marked bias towards black people, and this is why I say progressivism has worked: a lot of people who are otherwise not concerned with appearing politically correct now have the default position that they feel safer around black people, that they would trust them more readily. They've seen nothing but positive black stereotypes and role models in the media, and it's worked. This is Britain, of course, not America. And across the pond like this it's really hard to accurately gauge American culture. And boy, is it different, especially where race is concerned. But we do have a lot of social media noise, a lot of online spaces, a lot of news and talk shows and interviews and reality TV that carry American culture to us (through however many filters). We have access to a lot of American culture on our screens and devices. And again, I actively look for real racism, surviving in the wild in this day and age, and it's there, but it doesn't look systemic. It's all contained in weird little pockets of vile people, places like 4chan and those closed Facebook groups edzieba alluded to. On the face of it, racism in America seems to work a lot like Flat Earth Theory or creationism; a minority of individuals believe it, but they have to tread lightly and seclude themselves away and discuss it in private, because it's widely rejected by the society at large. It isn't accepted or tolerated in any workplaces, social spaces or public platforms. And that's a success story in my book. What is driving my bewilderment and skepticism here is that the catalyst to this - Floyd's murder by a corrupt asshole cop - doesn't seem to me like evidence of systemic racism. It doesn't seem remotely connected to racism. The officer seems like a foul piece of work, sure, and there may be a racial component to his behaviour, but there may not be - it sounded like he may also have known Floyd, pending further info on that? So an asshole committed police brutality and murdered someone, for reasons unknown. And that started a global movement of angst about racism. I can't join the dots. I appreciate the effort some of you are making to steer this towards a general conversation about racism in society, because that is a healthier direction than all this anti-police stuff. Societal racism may still exist; the American justice system, in particular, warrants further examination. The lack of social mobility for blacks is a weird situation that needs tackling. The social mobility and opportunities of blacks are still a problem. But BLM and the protesters have been, throughout, extremely anti-police. The police, specifically, are held up as a case of systemic racism. They're the main story. And that doesn't make sense to me. Michael Brown is routinely included in the list of victims of racially motivated police brutality. But he robbed a shop and shoved a store clerk - that was the trigger to the encounter with police. And forensics aligned pretty exactly with the officer's version of events, that Brown reached into the police car and struggled with the officer, tried to take his gun, and was shotly afterwards shot while advancing towards him. The officer is still routinely mentioned as an example of an obviously evil person, and Brown is sanctified as a martyr. He had vigils, flowers, a plaque. The officer is a pariah and voluntarily removed himself from the force because he feared that his presence would put other officers working with him in danger of retribution. The treatment of this case by social media and by BLM, and the fact that it is still included in the list of victims of systemic racism, is baffling to me, and it suggests that the facts are not important to them. Riots happened over Brown's death. The details of his death didn't matter, beyond the fact that he was killed by a white cop; it fitted the narrative. I'm very keen to root out what I call narrative bias, because it exists everywhere and it's one of the biggest problems we face in our political engagements and our perceptions of society now. It's the reason all Tories think that Corbyn voters are secretly Communists, it's the reason Corbyn supporters think that Tories want to bring back the mills. It's the reason both men's rights activists and post-third wave feminists think the world is set up to persecute them, despite the real situation being rather subtle and nuanced. In a nutshell, it's wilful confirmation bias over a long period of time; a sustained pattern of fact selection where people build a narrative from available evidence and don't assess things objectively. I would reject cynicism about statistics. It's often mentioned: the idea that "you can show anything with statistics". It's nonsense. You can appear to bolster any position with bad or cherry-picked stats. But if stats are suitably large, suitably sourced, balanced, interpreted and framed, they converge towards the truth. It's not an easy or quick process - appealing to emotions and popular stereotypes is much easier and quicker. The idea of racist white cops brutalizing black people is right there in all of our minds, because it certainly was a real thing a few decades ago. The extent to which it has petered out is up for debate, but it seems very unlikely to me that police still think about race the way they did in the 60s. * Which brings me to the point mentioned earlier. Police in the US are notably good at stonewalling and protecting their own. There is a distinct lack of accountability, and the implementations of bodycams and dashcams has been a really shocking example of this. There is something deeply wrong, something militant and hypervigilant and reckless, about the way some US police deal with civilians. That, I would argue, is the real problem that these deaths illustrate. And my point a couple of days ago in mentioning Tony Timpa is that he was another example of exactly the same problem. He was unarmed, non-threatening, confused. He called the police for help and they sat on him and suffocated him, laughing and making jokes while he begged for his life. It's exactly like Floyd. This problem, of police brutality, wouldn't be smaller than racism; if it affects anyone, if anyone can be a victim of it, then it's bigger than racism. The pattern of police brutality doesn't suggest systemic racism; it suggests systemic brutality and unaccountability. So I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I'm saying BLM has misdiagnosed it. And these protests and riots, this global surge of Diana-esque emotional outpouring, is built on a narrative that doesn't really make sense. If systemic racism has survived within police forces and continues to flourish, why are forces so multiracial? Why are there non-whites in positions of authority? How does racism survive in that kind of environment? We all have a narrative bias towards the idea of racist white cops, but I don't think we're re-examining it often enough. I think it might be really out of date. What's likelier: that a multiethnic police force closes ranks to protect killer cops because it's racist and white supremacist, or because it's just corrupt? When that force is multiracial, when it's in a society that constantly restates the unacceptability of racism and makes repeated efforts to root out racism, I would argue that the explanation is more likely to be that cops have a problem with accountability, rather than a problem with racism. This is like a bone I can't let go of because I think the protesters and activists might be missing the mark on something really important. Police brutality is one of the most bizarre evils we see. We trust the police implicitly, with our lives and our safety. Violations of that trust are awful. But the BLM narrative, if incorrect, will in the long run only make us look foolish and delay the kinds of reform and action we actually need. What if task forces are established, again, as they were under Obama, and they find, again, that systemic racism isn't the problem? Will we then have a second round of enquiries to solve the problem of police brutality generally? Probably not, because the momentum will be gone. One last word, I'd like to apologise for the length of this post. One thing I am a little embarrassed about is the extent to which I waffle on. I do try to edit and condense these posts, but I'm struggling to explain myself properly in fewer words. edit - That's actually a brilliant little video, thank you. This kind of issue is plausible, and very hard to trace, prove and root out - but the hiring stats are one thing I've picked up on as a strong indicator. But BLM isn't rioting about hiring statistics. It's rioting about killer cops. That's where I'm hung up at the moment. edit - another interesting article, this one mentions stop-and-frisk as an example of racial profiling by police, which is something I'm still trying to find more information on: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-52895490
Ask yourself why they are working outside the normal political structures. And to criticise BLM for inflaming racial tensions is absolutely ludicrous. It's like when people get angry about injustice and the response is to plead for decorum. It's a strategy used to delegitimise the argument, undermine the grievances and deflect from the issues. You're not American, but you are white (granted, that's an assumption on my part but it's an informed one). You benefit from white privilege and that is reinforced by systemic racism (which is by no means confined to the USA). So you live in an area that's overwhelmingly white and that's your example as to why systemic racism doesn't exist? Really? Look, I think we could go back and forth forever but fundamentally: when people are telling you that they are oppressed; that they are targeted by the police; that they are living in fear that an encounter with law enforcement could lead to their death, or the death of their son, father, brother; that they are prevented from exercising their democratic right to vote; that they experience constant, everyday micro-aggressions on the street, in their workplace, on campus or in shops; and that this is pervasive, universal and built into the fabric of society, then to be honest I think that you should listen to them, accept that they know more about it than you do, and hopefully then ask yourself whether this is an acceptable state of affairs and whether there's anything you can do to change things for the better. Alternatively you can tell them that they're wrong, that you know better, and that they should sit down, be quiet and stop causing such a fuss.
Every critical response to BLM I've seen seems to be "what, so white lives don't?", or "all lives matter" and then fail to get the full meaning of what they just said. It's just a moronic literal take on Black Lives Matter as a statement instead of the obvious interpretation of it as Black Lives Matter Too.
And this, folks, is how you debate. There's one thing that stood out to me, from the wikipedia article on Michael Brown (yes, I actually read the whole post), and it was this: "Witness 22: No. I just felt like I want to be part of something" The above quote refers to a witness who lied about what she saw, having to admit it when she kept contradicting herself. This is the problem with the social media entranced society of today (in my opinion). Too many people just want an excuse to draw attention to themselves. Anyway, ignore this post, read the one above. It's far more poignant
I did have mixed feelings about that part when editing my post, because I know that tone arguments are silly and I've had them used against me before. But I would counter that it's only ludicrous if BLM's narrative is accurate and if their concerns are valid. If they're not, if racial tensions didn't exist and the protest movement creates or reignites them, then I think it's a fair criticism. Yes, definitely. The whole point of that personal example is that people around here should, by rights, be extremely racist. Not just against blacks, but against Poles in particular, as we've had a lot of Polish immigration and illegal immigration in Lincolnshire. Yet I struggled to even find examples of anti-Polish sentiment. Most people, even white native people who've worked alongside and for Polish illegals, didn't have any ill will or harmful stereotypes about Poles. That really struck me. I don't think the average 21st century person is as likely to be susceptible to racist thinking as the BLM movement supposes. I think the last 20 years of progressivism has very effectively immunized most of us against racist thought.
To some extent you have to control the narrative, shut out differing opinions and other topics etc... Because if you don't do so you end up losing focus, having a watered down message and achieving nothing. Basically if you want advocacy on issues BLM doesn't cover that isn't a problem, but keep that other advocacy as it's own thing rather than trying to drag BLM into it.
If you think racism doesn't exist here simply because you haven't seen it, you're very much mistaken. My nieces are mixed race and have suffered terrible racist abuse since moving to North Devon 8years ago. After one particularly bad incident where some boys from school had been spouting white power bs and 'N', the headmaster's response was "well what do you expect when it's they say it all the time in rap music" and no action was taken against the boys. It is very much alive and kicking in the UK.
Oh come on now. Racial tensions absolutely do exist and you would need to be in wilful denial to think otherwise. Again, why are you so determined to deny black people's lived experiences and their attempts to bring those into the arena of mainstream debate? You don't believe that what they are telling you is true? Why are you so insistent that they are wrong and you know better? And yet again, if BLM and others are telling you that racism is alive, kicking and part of their everyday lives, why are you insisting that just because you haven't seen it (much), it can't possibly exist? Why don't you believe people when they are telling you that there's a problem? Exactly. Again, it's a tool used to stifle debate when one group raises their issues to insist that group instead solve everyone's problems. See "All lives matter" as an adjunct.
Not many people will admit to being racist when directly asked. Because a lot of people know enough to know that anyone asking that question probably doesn't share their opinions in that regard. The word "racist" has a lot of well earned, well deserved, negative connotations. I had a friend who claimed not to be racist, but definitely had racist opinions about certain races. Ask him, though, whether he's racist? Of course not. Not ever. Hell, the lady who showed us the place I now live said they'd had a lot of Turkish applicants, and I quote, "I'm not racist, but I don't think they fit in around here." Which, undoubtedly, is racist as ****. I lived in the US, and while I was quite young, there was no hiding the kind of racism that, on the surface, doesn't seem like racism to other white people. One of my dads work colleagues lived in Detroit (We lived in Dearborn, a very white neighbourhood at the time, I don't know if it still is), and when we went with said colleague to a car show, there were things said like "Oh, we don't go there" to an all-white group of people when there were very clearly people (of colour) 'there'. It didn't occur to me until many, many, years later that it might have been a race thing. 'cause I'm white. I'm probably still blind to a lot of things, but more than a little part of me is very, very, conscious that a lot of institutions and people are racist. Hell, the furore when Obama was the first president that wasn't white should tell you how racist America can be. Is all of America racist? Probably not. Is a disturbingly large amount of it - People and institutions? Yup. Definitely. The unspoken impositions on how people of colour are treated by banking institutions, the education system, the government itself (Gerrymandering, for example, is quite popular in US politics - And there are more than a few resources on how it's been used to deprive communities of representation by slicing them up and effectively suppressing their votes. I think even John Oliver has done a nice segment on it, although the focus was purely on democrat/republican, it serves as a nice explanation of how it works) should be proof enough that there is a severe problem with racism in America. These protests are because there is no other way to demand change. The systems in place were created by racist white people. They are maintained by an unhealthy number of racist white people. The last time people of colour got anywhere near the level of white success, their businesses were burned down, people were killed, the state government rezoned their ruined property, and said property was bought up by white people for fractions of its prior value. People of colour have, in the end, no political voice. They have very little financial voice, none really, when compared to the vast wealth of white people. How many people of colour could become president, not step back from their business interests as required, not divulge their taxes as every other president has (Although I don't think it's legally required.. Not sure on that one), could say racist **** on TV and on Twitter? None. But I bet my socks the next time a white racist gets into power, they'll feel about as restricted as Trump does. Things are shifting (Too slowly in some places, not at all in others) towards an equality, but there is definitely a huge rift between white people and people of colour under the current system. In many situations it is absolutely right to challenge the narrative, to question everything, but there is no challenge to the narrative that racism in America (And everywhere else, for that matter) is alive, well, and killing people with impunity.
The president of the nation wants to bring in their expeditionary armed forces (and has been trying to bring in their domestic armed forces) to violently quash protests. He's used the same phrase used during previous violent suppression. Contrary to institutions at every level being progressive, they are instead racist from the top down.
It's not exactly "new", but 1921. "Tulsa race massacre". The lead-up, the event, and the aftermath of the event are pretty much racism 101.
My OH is mixed race and she has been on the receiving end of both more active and passive racism for most of her life (she's 26), and not just from white people either. Part of the issue is what people consider racism, and so people might think they're not racist because they don't use the N word and they wouldn't refuse to serve someone because of the colour of their skin, but they might not see a problem with touching a black woman's hair, or making a comment about how thin someone is by comparing them to Biafrans. The latter being something my father did very recently without thinking, and whilst I didn't think it was very PC I didn't quite click it, and it was only after talking to my OH that I've begun to realise more that racism isn't as simple as using the N word for example. It's very easy to not be the 'obvious racist' and I do think that's something that has massively improved, although still a problem, but it's the less obvious examples than can sometimes be worse, due to those people thinking of themselves as the good guys and not realising they may be subtlety maintaining systems and environments where more 'obvious' racists flourish. As @bawjaws has alluded to, the minimisation or disregarding of the stories and experience of people of colour is one of those less obvious aspects of racism. Edit: An infographic showing the kind of thing I'm trying to say.
