What IS racism?

[elder999]

dont play stupid Jeff.

that was just an example, and it is factual:

http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf


but that is besides the point, the point is, "what is racism"

and the problem is, it is different things to different people. For some, like those jackasses Jackson and Sharpton, EVERYTHING is racism.

for others, like me, not much is, and most claims of racism are BS.

eye of the beholder and all that

How can it be factual when the FBI stats directly refute it? At least, on the face they do-make those statistics per capita and the discussion becomes far more interesting (and far more than "DOUBLE the RATE" )

Indeed, though, Irony, thy name is "TwinFist"

I tried to click your link. I'm at work. Guess what?

This Websense category is filtered: Racism and Hate.
URL:
http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf

Why am I not surprised.

Eye of the beholder, though, and all that.....

 

[Twin Fist]

so you dismiss it without even reading it?

lame dude.

 

[elder999]

so you dismiss it without even reading it?

lame dude.

I'll get an eyeball on it later, even if I have to use my droid.

My webfilter dismissed it, and labeled it.

 

[Twin Fist]

and i should give a **** exactly WHY?


like i said, i dont even care about that, that was just an example, and i knwo the truth anyway

what i DO care about is that you cant reach agreement till everyone is speakign the same language. and tanks to jackholes like duke, sharpton, jackson, etc, a lot fo people aint even listening.

 

[elder999]

and i should give a **** exactly WHY?

Here's why:

The New Century Foundation is nonprofit organization founded in 1994 to study immigration and race relations. From 1994 to 1999 its activities received considerable funding by the Pioneer Fund.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP], and has been described as a white supremacist group.[SUP][4][/SUP]
The organization is headed by founder Jared Taylor and is known primarily for publishing American Renaissance. Taylor advocates voluntary segregation as a natural expression of racial solidarity while denying that his views constitute white supremacism. Viewing societal problems as racial and religious in nature, Taylor upholds racial homogeneity as the key to peaceful coexistence.

And here's the wiki on "The Color of Crime":

The Color of Crime is a publication by the New Century Foundation, authored by Jared Taylor, describing race differences in criminal offending in the United States.[SUP][1][/SUP]
The study finds that African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately overrepresented among criminal offenders, while Asian Americans are underrepresented.
There is also a study in the publication showing a correlation between the proportion of Black residents in a community and the community's crime rate. According to the publication, the proportion of residents that are African American or Hispanic better predicts a community's crime rate than do other variables.

Heere's what the SPLC has to say about "The Color of Crime":

Based on a cursory examination of 1994 data about interracial crimes between whites and blacks — less than a sixth of all crimes committed that year — Taylor comes to a series of what he describes as "startling conclusions" about black criminality. Blacks, he claims, are vastly more likely to attack whites than vice versa and, in fact, are far more prone to criminality in general. The reason, Taylor suggests amidst a blizzard of misleading statistics, is their blackness — something about black genes, or perhaps black culture, that endows African-Americans with a natural proclivity to criminality.

Now. please look back to Bill's excellent definition of racism.

what i DO care about is that you cant reach agreement till everyone is speakign the same language. and tanks to jackholes like duke, sharpton, jackson, etc, a lot fo people aint even listening.

You could add Jared Taylor to that list of jackholes, and consider just who it is that isn't listening......

 

[Twin Fist]

wiki? for all I know, YOU just went and edited it........./eyeroll

here is the kicker though


what if he is right?

the numbers are the numbers, so what if he is right?

weather the guy is a clod or not is irrelevant IF HE IS RIGHT

and AGAIN< NOT THE ****ING POINT JEFF

the point is, you cannot have a discussion, much less an agreement of anything till you have an agreement on terms.

For example:

cant get a cab in New York City? to you that might be racism, to somone else it might not be.

 

[David43515]

No one is as blind as those who refuse to see. Twin, I`ve stood up for you in the past when you`ve made good points, but you refuse to even acknowledge when Elder is right. You call him out for being skeptical of a sight he can`t access from work, a site with a bad reputation for skewing facts and figures to make their point. But then you turn around and say you trust their figures more than the FBI`s, and that you can`t even discuss the issue until you agree on terms. Well, okay. Meet him halfway in trying to define terms. I`ll bet the two of you actually agree on a whole lot more than you disagree on, but you`ll never know if you don`t take the time to look for that common ground. (That means listening and being willing to admit at least the possability that you might be wrong.)

I apologize for calling you on this infront of everyone, but I`ve seen it from alot of folks here lately and I thought they could use the same advice. And that`s all it is, opinion and advice.

 

[elder999]

wiki? for all I know, YOU just went and edited it........./eyeroll

here is the kicker though


what if he is right?

the numbers are the numbers, so what if he is right?

I'll field this last, and then I'll stay out of this part of the discussion.

"The numbers," per that particular document, are not the numbers. While you can find any number of appalling statistics about black crime (if you look at the FBI page I posted, blacks simply commit more violent crime), in The Color of Crime Jared Taylor is guilty of faulty analysis. He's guilty of selection bias, something everyone who has taken statistics (I've had to endure it with every degree-same book three times!) recognizes as, well, wrong, an error, verboten, forbidden, dumpkopfism. By using a sample that represented only a sixth of the crimes committed in 1994, and focusong on, well, the wrong things-he ignored the fact that the majority of crime is intra-racial. Blacks are most often victimized by blacks, and whites by whites. He had (just as in Maka's spanking stories, as I warned) a preconceived outcome that he needed to tailor his data to, and that's what he did.

SO, when it comes to "the numbers"-if that's what you meant-he isn't right. He didn't even have to do this, though, the raw data is bad enough.

weather the guy is a clod or not is irrelevant IF HE IS RIGHT

and AGAIN< NOT THE ****ING POINT JEFF

the point is, you cannot have a discussion, much less an agreement of anything till you have an agreement on terms.

Well, do you mean that he was right about the numbers, or right in implying that there is something biologically or genetically inherent in being black that leads to a predisposition towards violence and crime?

For example:

cant get a cab in New York City? to you that might be racism, to somone else it might not be.

Well, yeah-I'm standing at the corner in my suit trying to hail a cab, and they keep passing me and picking up other fares just down the road, and I'm going to have some thoughts. To be honest, though, I've never had a problem getting a cab in New York City-or anywhere else-even as scary as I can look.

And now, I'll leave you with the words of Jared Taylor, author of The Color of Crime, founder and head of the New Century Foundation, segregationist, white supremacist, and racist(is that overly redundant? :lfao: ) at the 2008 American Renaissance conference:

If white people are to survive, they have to stop to stop playing lip service to this notion of equal outcomes. We have to be able to say to other groups, 'We wish you well, but you will have to seek your destiny in your own places. You will have to fashion your future in your own hands.' In that process of course, we will be denying to them the benefits of the societies our ancestors built. However, our ancestors built them for us, and we only hold them in trust for succeeding generations, and our societies are not ours to give away to strangers

 

[Tez3]

by the definition you posted this is a racist statement:

sickle cell anemia almost 100% a back persons disease.

it is also 100% true, people other than blacks with sickle cell are as rare as hens teeth

Actually that's not true either, it's quite common in Mediterrean countries such as Cyprus, Turkey and Greece as well as the Middle East and latin America.

"Sickle cell anemia affects millions throughout the world. It is particularly common among people whose ancestors come from sub-Saharan Africa; Spanish-speaking regions (South America, Cuba, Central America); Saudi Arabia; India; and Mediterranean countries such as Turkey, Greece, and Italy. In the Unites States, it affects around 72,000 people, most of whose ancestors come from Africa. The disease occurs in about 1 in every 500 African-American births and 1 in every 1000 to 1400 Hispanic-American births. About 2 million Americans, or 1 in 12 African Americans, carry the sickle cell trait."

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/posters/chromosome/sca.shtml

 

[Twin Fist]

uh, i didnt do that

But then you turn around and say you trust their figures more than the FBI`s

 

[Twin Fist]

i actually read the report unlike you Jeff, and the author didnt claim that at all. So you are either mistaken or making things up.

Well, do you mean that he was right about the numbers, or right in implying that there is something biologically or genetically inherent in being black that leads to a predisposition towards violence and crime?

and i dont know if he is right or not, cuz here is another kicker, no one want s to report the numbers accuratly for fear of even sounding racist.

 

[elder999]

i actually read the report unlike you Jeff, and the author didnt claim that at all. So you are either mistaken or making things up.and i dont know if he is right or not, cuz here is another kicker, no one want s to report the numbers accuratly for fear of even sounding racist.

Didn't say what, John? I've made nothing up.And you won't get more accurate statistics than those of the FBI, which I posted here. I'll get to the report in a bit.......

 

[elder999]

i actually read the report unlike you Jeff, and the author didnt claim that at all. So you are either mistaken or making things up.
.

From the conclusion of the report, pgs. 19&20:

This report takes no position on causes of groupdifferences in crime rates, except to point out thatthe ones that are most commonly proposed&#8212;poverty,unemployment, lack of education&#8212;are not satisfactory.As for the reality of those differences, theevidence is overwhelming: Blacks are considerably​

more likely than any other group to commit crimes

of virtually all kinds, while Asians are least likely.Whites and Hispanics have intermediate crime rates.There can be debate about the exact extent of thedifferences&#8212;the data do not make these calculationseasy&#8212;but differences are a fact.These differences are far greater than some thathave given rise to significant public initiatives.Blacks are more than twice as likely as whites to beunemployed, and white household income is 60 percenthigher than black household income. Blacksare twice as likely as whites to drop out of highschool. Race differences of this kind have led toeverything from affirmative action preferences to​

No Child Left Behind legislation.

It's clear-since it's not poverty, unemployment or lack of education that the author finds as "satisfactory" causes (though he both fails to demonstrate why they are unsatisfactory, and somewhat contradicts himself in the very next paragraph?) that the implied cause for these "differences" must be racial in nature.

The report is skewed and inflammatory from the very beginning:

O​

​

​

​

n March 11, 2005, Brian Nichols, who wason trial for rape, went on a murderous rampageat an Atlanta courthouse, shooting ajudge, a court reporter, and a deputy. After his arrest,he explained that he was a &#8220;soldier on a mission&#8221;against a racially biased legal system. In jailawaiting his rape trial, he had been angry to find somany other black inmates, and he wondered howmany were innocent. For him, the large number ofblacks meant the legal system was &#8220;systematic slavery.&#8221;​

1​

Mr. Nichols&#8217;s views were only an extreme versionof what a majority of black Americans believe.A 2003 national poll found that only 28 percent ofblacks, as opposed to 66 percent of whites, thought​

whites and blacks receive
equal treatment at thehands of the police.

While it may be the perception of blacks that we don't receive equal treatment at the hands of the police, there is a difference between that perception and the results of "the criminal justice system," which includes the courts. Frankly, I don't think blacks receive equal treatment from the police-I've been subject to suspicion on the basis of my skin color alone on numerous occasions since my teenage years, and I have no reason to believe that I was the only one, in spite of my always being polite and compliant with the police.

Likewise, to equate that perception, and the results of the poll, as only a milder version of the homicidal actions and expressions of one individual is reckless and inflammatory, and manipulative as hell....I'd no more shoot up a courthouse than I would a schoolhouse or even a litter of kittens-and we all know how I feel about cats: a lot worse than I do about white people,black people, judges or police. :lfao:

Most Americans at least suspect that blacks andHispanics are more likely to commit crimes thanwhites or Asians. The data support this view. However,the crime statistics published by the federalgovernment and reported in the press are incompleteand often confusing. It takes real digging to get aclear picture of racial differences in crime rates&#8212;​

and they can be great

Here, he's simply lying. I had no difficulty at all going directly to the FBI table that breaks down crime stats by race, and linking it here. If he isn't lying, then he's yet another moron with a Harvard degree....:lfao:

 

[punisher73]

Considering that "whites" are about 80% of the population, common sense would tell you that they would also commit the most crimes. To try and make it seem otherwise is a HUGE skew of the data. Here are some examples from the FBI report from 2009 ( http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_43.html )

Total Crime: 69% Whites vs. 28% Blacks
Murder/Manslaughter: 48.7% Whites vs. 49.3% Blacks
Robbery: 45% Whites vs. 55% Blacks
Suspicion of a crime: 45% Whites vs. 55% Blacks

So, out of 30 reportable crimes, only 2 categories have black people committing more types of crime and one of those is almost 50/50. In fact, almost 60% of ALL violent crime is done by white people. Now, you can very easily twist the data and only point out murder and robbery and make an incomplete statement that would be true in a certain way, but also misleading and false overall.

As Mark Twain once said, "There are lies, damed lies, and statistics"

 

[Sukerkin]

Just to add in the statistical point (without knowing the methodology used in the data collection of the stats that Punisher posted).

If there is an 80/20 split in the population demography and the crime stats do not follow that split then one side or the other is under or over represented in the categories. The robbery category particularly grabs my attention with 55% of the crimes being perpetrated by a demographic that is only 20% of the population!

I'll have to dig into the source data to see if they are adjusted for population proportion but if they are not then it speaks volumes about the failure of culture to ensure that people pursue equality of outcomes rather than just turn to crime as a means of making a living.

Have to agree with the Twain quote, especially as I had to do an awful lot of statistics in my educational 'path'. That's why you have to be so clear about how the stats are gathered and how they have been collated.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Considering that "whites" are about 80% of the population, common sense would tell you that they would also commit the most crimes. To try and make it seem otherwise is a HUGE skew of the data.

Common sense would tell you that it should rain the same amount everywhere. But we recognize that it seems to rain more in Oregon than it does in Arizona. Ah, we say, but there are reasons why this is so. The US is not the same everyplace. Yes indeed. There are reasons why 'common sense' would be mistaken. It might also be true that all parts of the USA are not the same with regard to crime, and that the races are not evenly distributed across the nation. So again, we have reasons, valid reasons, that might explain why the numbers are different which do NOT point at simple conclusions.

All data has to be taken in context, or the conclusions drawn are unlikely to be accurate.

It is one thing to state that crime rates are higher on a per capita basis for one racial group than another for a given type of crime in a given time period and quite another to attempt to explain why that is so.

We are not evenly distributed across the USA with regard to race, so one has to ask if the crime rates for white versus black crime have similar disproportionate numbers in every area of the country. If they are higher in one place than they are in another, then that is data that must also be considered; it's hardly skewing the numbers to do so; it's considered the correct scientific process.

We are not evenly distributed with regard to income and poverty rates, so one has to ask if the crime rates for white crime versus black crime have similar disproportionate numbers when grouped by income. If they are higher in one economic class than another, then that data too must be considered.

Differences in education? This must also be taken into account when attempting to attach a reason to the raw data.

I am not a statistician but I believe this is what is known as 'normalizing' the data.

In the end, and speaking hypothetically only, if it were possible to control for every known variable and still come up with a conclusion that blacks commit crimes at a higher rate than whites, it is at least theoretically possible to arrive at a scientifically-sound conclusion that it is because blacks are simply more inclined to violate the law than whites. I tend to doubt that any such conclusion could ever be drawn, for many reasons, including fear of being labeled racist, but also including the notion that there are simply too many variables that affect crime rates to ever come to such a conclusion legitimately.

We have the data, but we do not have the cause of the data, and to simply take it at face value is misleading and scientifically unsound.

 

[WC_lun]

I would be more interested to see the stats on crime rate between different income levels. I think that might be more honest stats to reflect causation than race.

Blacks have a higher crime rate per capita than whites. On the surface it is easy to equate that to blacks are more prone to being a criminal, especially if you already have a racist bent to your thinking. However, it is also true that blacks are far more likely to be poor, be less educated, and suffer violence than whites. So the issue of blacks and crime becomes way more complex than an issue of race.

I know this isn't very scientific, but my nieghborhood is a mix of white and black, with some hispanic and asian people too. In my experience of my nieghborhood, race has nothing to do with who will be a criminal or troublemaker. Most of the time it is the parents and who a young person decides to associate themselves with that will make the biggest difference.

As far as racism, it is not racism to point out that blacks have a higher crime rate. It is simple minded racism to believe that they have a higher crime rate because of the color of thier skin.

 

[punisher73]

Common sense would tell you that it should rain the same amount everywhere. But we recognize that it seems to rain more in Oregon than it does in Arizona. Ah, we say, but there are reasons why this is so. The US is not the same everyplace. Yes indeed. There are reasons why 'common sense' would be mistaken. It might also be true that all parts of the USA are not the same with regard to crime, and that the races are not evenly distributed across the nation. So again, we have reasons, valid reasons, that might explain why the numbers are different which do NOT point at simple conclusions.

All data has to be taken in context, or the conclusions drawn are unlikely to be accurate.

It is one thing to state that crime rates are higher on a per capita basis for one racial group than another for a given type of crime in a given time period and quite another to attempt to explain why that is so.

We are not evenly distributed across the USA with regard to race, so one has to ask if the crime rates for white versus black crime have similar disproportionate numbers in every area of the country. If they are higher in one place than they are in another, then that is data that must also be considered; it's hardly skewing the numbers to do so; it's considered the correct scientific process.

We are not evenly distributed with regard to income and poverty rates, so one has to ask if the crime rates for white crime versus black crime have similar disproportionate numbers when grouped by income. If they are higher in one economic class than another, then that data too must be considered.

Differences in education? This must also be taken into account when attempting to attach a reason to the raw data.

I am not a statistician but I believe this is what is known as 'normalizing' the data.

In the end, and speaking hypothetically only, if it were possible to control for every known variable and still come up with a conclusion that blacks commit crimes at a higher rate than whites, it is at least theoretically possible to arrive at a scientifically-sound conclusion that it is because blacks are simply more inclined to violate the law than whites. I tend to doubt that any such conclusion could ever be drawn, for many reasons, including fear of being labeled racist, but also including the notion that there are simply too many variables that affect crime rates to ever come to such a conclusion legitimately.

We have the data, but we do not have the cause of the data, and to simply take it at face value is misleading and scientifically unsound.

To me, common sense would tell me that it would rain more in a forest type area (Oregon) than in a desert type area (Arizonia).

All the rest I am in complete agreement with, that was why I stated that the data shows overall that white people commit more crimes and more violent crimes and ended with the Twain quote about statistics.

Originally, I had in my post about the data not telling you "who" is committing the crimes etc. but I was in a hurry and didn't finish that thought. In it, I was going to compare one of the stats that was out of whack with percentages and talk about murder. How many of the "murders" are gang related vs. heat of the moment vs. other crime gone mad vs. drunk driving deaths etc.

In the end, as you already stated better than me. The data gives a broad brush stroke and doesn't really tell us much more than that.

 

[Archangel M]

Just for refrence:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...iolence-in-America.-quot&highlight=race+crime

 

[punisher73]

For some reason, this other post of mine didn't go through.


As to what is racism. When I had Sociology in college, I remember this discussion and what was the difference between racism and prejudice. The textbook we used (can't remember quite honestly for giving it as a source) defined 'racism' as the ACTIONS against someone based on color and prejudicism. Prejudice was the attitude and beliefs aspect of it.

I believe that ALL people are prejudice. That is how we are as humans. ALL of us pre-judge based on personal experience or beliefs given to us from parents, teachers, society, peers etc. But, not all people act on those beliefs. We can all think of examples of all races and ages where they did something and we thought to ourself and were surprised that they acted that way. It is because we had "pre-judged" them on factors that in our experience would have led to a different set of behaviors.