2020-05-25 George Floydin kuolema Minneapolisissa ja BLM-protestit ympäri maailmaa

[foobar]

[tweet]1289200519102132225[/tweet]

Totalitärismi saapuu keskuutemme vääjäämättä mutta muodot ja niiden logiikka ovat jotain mitä ei ennalta voi arvata. Ihan oikeasti... milloin jääkiekosta on tullut poliittisen totalitärismin areena? Neuvostoliitolla ja Reaganin Yhdysvalloilla ei ollut mitään vaikeuksia otella keskenään mutta nyt Land of the Free on paikka jossa on jokaisen ottelijan kannatettava ja kunnioitettava yhtä asiaa, eikä se suinkaan ole esim. kansallislaulu tai lippu.

[foobar]

Tässä ketjussa kun on keskusteltu mustien äärimenosta, niin noin niin kuin perspektiivin vuoksi mainitsen uudestaan tämän härövideogenren jossa joku musta marginaaliryhmä perustelee Raamatun sanomalla sitä, että valkoisten pitäisi suudella mustien jalkoja.

#ISUPK NORTH CAROLINA - WHEN HEATHENS #RECOGNIZE TRUE #PROPHETS OF #GOD (9:27)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8SCmAdUJJA

ISUPK Oakland boot kiss 08/25/18 (5:45)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gGRYPo9UHs

Fake Hebrew Israelites Guilt Tripping Whites To Kiss And Lick Boots (42:05)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Hja8Bpfrig

Mustat ovat kaiken hyvän takana mutta valkoisten salaliitto kätkee sen -ajattelu on nostanut viimeisen vuosikymmenen aikana Jenkeissä kannatustaan merkittävästi. Käsittääkseni sillä ei edes ole merkityksellistä kannatusta muualla ainakaan itsensä elättävien mustien keskuudessa, mutta siellä ovat kaiken maailman African-American Studiesit (ilman vastakritiikkiään) ja niiden lieveilmiöt luoneet amerikkalaisen mielipiteenvapauden kanssa hedelmällisen pohjan teorioille joiden puitteissa kaikki, aivan kaikki on "mustien" ansiota, ja että epäilys siitä ettei näin olisikaan on itsessään raskauttava asiainhaara kriitikkoja vastaan. En usko että hirvittävän suuri osa Jenkkien mustista uskoo näihin juttuihin, mutta toisaalta yksikään demokraattipoliitikko ei halua näitä kritisoida. Tämä on poliittisilla perusteilla fabrikoitua historiaa ja rotukiihkoilua puhtaimmillaan mutta sitähän ei saa sanoa ääneen. Odotan mielenkiinnon ja kauhun sekoituksella sitä mitä tästä oikeasti tällä kertaa seuraa.

[Valli]

[tweet]1289227655347204098[/tweet]
[tweet]1289229355273424898[/tweet]

Seattle Moves To Replace 'Racist' Police With 'Trauma-Informed, Gender-Affirming, Anti-Racist' Organizations

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/seattle-moves-replace-racist-police-trauma-informed-gender-affirming-anti-racist

[ismolento]

Amnestyn merkittävin tunnuspiirre on, että se pyrkii kumoamaan oikeusvaltion: olet syyllinen ellet koko ajan todista ettet ole.

BLM:n kommunismi käy selville jo pelkästään sen kirjaimista: BoLshevisMi - БоЛьшевизМ

Kummallista, että nyt kun kaikki todennäköisyys ja logiikka viittaavat siihen, että Venäjä on yksi vaikuttaja BLM-huliganismin ja USA:n kahtiajakautumisen takana, liberaalimedia ei sanallakaan edes epäile sitä. Kun taas kaikki liberaalimediat kommentaattoreineen olivat varmoja, että Venäjän tiedustelupalvelu valitsi Trumpin presidentiksi.

[IDA]

Seattle Moves To Replace 'Racist' Police With 'Trauma-Informed, Gender-Affirming, Anti-Racist' Organizations

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/seattle-moves-replace-racist-police-trauma-informed-gender-affirming-anti-racist

Lievästi huvittava puoli tässä on, että Seattlen poliisin päällikkö on musta nainen. Seattlen kaupunginhallinto, joka päätöksen poliisin korvaamisesta tekee taas on tässä:

https://www.seattle.gov/council/meet-the-council

[Fiftari]

Mietin kovasti että millä ne palauttavat normaalin asiantilan. Millään maailmanhalaus joukolla tuo ei onnistu. Rikollisuus tulee kasvamaan ja jengit alkavat lisääntymään tai sitten yhdistyvät yhden vahvan johtajan alle. Työssäkävijöiden kukkarolla käydään verojen ja ryöstön kautta kunnes joko muuttavat pois tai alkavat itsekin rikollisiksi.

Kun koko teatteri saavuttaa kriittisen pisteen niin onko helpompaa vetää muurit ympärille ja muuttaa seattle vain jättimäiseksi vankilaksi tyyliin escape from NY tai los angeles elokuvien tyyliin?

[nochWunder]

Mietin kovasti että millä ne palauttavat normaalin asiantilan. Millään maailmanhalaus joukolla tuo ei onnistu. Rikollisuus tulee kasvamaan ja jengit alkavat lisääntymään tai sitten yhdistyvät yhden vahvan johtajan alle. Työssäkävijöiden kukkarolla käydään verojen ja ryöstön kautta kunnes joko muuttavat pois tai alkavat itsekin rikollisiksi.

Kun koko teatteri saavuttaa kriittisen pisteen niin onko helpompaa vetää muurit ympärille ja muuttaa seattle vain jättimäiseksi vankilaksi tyyliin escape from NY tai los angeles elokuvien tyyliin?

Milläkö? Väkivallalla tietenkin. Jos demokraatit saisivat omat intersektionaaliset  poliisivoimansa ja BLM ideologien kadottua ei mustat tajuaisi totella, niin ne hyvin nopeasti väkivalloin pistetäisiin kuriin.

Ja siitä saisimme kuulla vain Fox -kanavalta, muut kanavat kertoisivat kuinka hurraahuutojen kera juhlien rauhalliset mielenosoittajat lähtivät kotimatkalle. Vaikka oikeasti niin brutaalia poliisiväkivaltaa ei olisi tavalliselta poliisilta koskaan nähty.

Homman nimi on koko ajan ollut se, että neutraalista poliisista halutaan eroon ja tilalle halutaan intersektionaalinen valkoisia vihaava poliisi, jotka voivat sitten aikanaa hoitaa myös joukkotuhontaa.

[zupi]

Tällaista tällä kertaa Portlandissa.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/01/portland-protesters-burn-bibles-american-flags-in-the-streets/

Portland Protesters Burn Bibles, American Flags in the Streets

Protesters flocked to the Justice Center and the federal courthouse in Portland again on Friday night, lighting fires and burning American flags and Bibles in the streets.

According to the Portland Police, which did not engage with demonstrators, the crowd lit several fires, including a large bonfire in the middle of the street in front of the federal courthouse. One video shows protesters feeding a small fire with Bibles, which were engulfed in flames:

[tweet]1289512762733785088[/tweet]

[tweet]1289468537698840578[/tweet]

Portland Police did not engage with the demonstrators but did respond to a nearby shooting, where over 150 rounds were shot.

According to journalist Andy Ngo, who has firsthand experience with Anftia rioters, there has been "a large uptick in shootings & homicides in Portland since @tedwheeler abolished the Gun Violence Reduction Team"

Pointsit tälle nuorelle sällille:

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/magic-jonathan-isaac-stands-national-anthem

Magic's Jonathan Isaac stands for national anthem as teammates, opponents kneel

Orlando Magic forward Jonathan Isaac was the lone player to stand during the national anthem on Friday as his teammates and Brooklyn Nets players knelt to protest racial injustice and police brutality.

Isaac was the lone person out of the first three games of the NBA's restarted season. He also didn't wear a Black Lives Matter shirt and instead chose to stand with his arms at his back with his Magic jersey showing.

In June, Isaac was asked about the protests following the police-involved death of George Floyd.

He told Click Orlando: "Just because we are in the position of being an NBA player, it doesn't give us automatically an understanding or insight to issues that happen around us. But I think because we have the ear of so many it's important for us to be diligent, to be vocal, but in a balanced way."

Oikeastaan tuossa jutussa tosin mielenkiinnon herätti tuo liitekuva, siis taustalla näkyvä teksti: "Peace Equality". Tuon täytynee olla joku saatanan huono vitsi, ottaen huomioon esim nuo Portlandin tapahtumat ja BLM-liikkeen vaatimukset?

Vielä tämä, tuo AOC on kyllä ihan täyskahjo.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/07/31/aoc-refers-to-canonized-saint-fr-damien-who-served-lepers-as-part-of-white-supremacist-culture/

AOC Refers to Canonized Saint Fr. Damien Who Served Lepers as Part of 'White Supremacist Culture'

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) denounced the presence of a statue honoring canonized saint Father Damien, who ministered to lepers and died of the dreaded disease, as a remnant of "white supremacist culture."

Ocasio-Cortez continued:

"This isn't to litigate each and every individual statue, but to point out the patterns that have emerged among the totality of them in who we are taught to deify in our nation's Capitol: virtually all men, all white, and mostly both. This is what patriarchy and white supremacist culture looks like! It's not radical or crazy to understand the influence white supremacist culture has historically had in our overall culture and how it impacts the present day."

Writing for Catholic News Agency, however, Matt Hadro reported that Dallas Carter, a native Hawaiian and a catechist for the diocese of Honolulu, observed St. Damien of Molokai is a "hero" to the people of Hawaii.

Father Damien "gave his life" ministering to the leper colony at Kalaupapa peninsula, Carter told Hadro.

"Any Hawaiian here who is aware of their history – which most Hawaiians are – would absolutely, Catholic or not, defend the legacy of Damien as a man who was embraced by the people, and who is a hero to us because of his love for the Hawaiian people," he said.

"We did not judge him by the color of his skin," Carter added. "We judged him by the love that he had for our people."

[Lahti-Saloranta]

Tuo Raamattujen ja Amerikan lippujen polttaminen on todella hyvä idea varsinkin kun demokraatit ja aehdokas Sandels tukevat kyseistä liikettä.

[MannaSariini]

^^Ehkä tämä vastaa aimpaan kysymykseeni AOC:n mahdollisesta "kolonialismin" vastustamisesta. Eikö hänen nimensä itsessään ilmennä "kolonialismia" ja "valkoista ylivaltaa"? Ainakin tuo C-osa Cortez on yhdistettävissä konkistadori Hernán Cortésiin (tunnetaan myös nimellä Hernando Cortes), vaikka vähän eri kirjoitusasussa AOC:n nimessä onkin. 

[nollatoleranssi]

Mietin kovasti että millä ne palauttavat normaalin asiantilan. Millään maailmanhalaus joukolla tuo ei onnistu. Rikollisuus tulee kasvamaan ja jengit alkavat lisääntymään tai sitten yhdistyvät yhden vahvan johtajan alle. Työssäkävijöiden kukkarolla käydään verojen ja ryöstön kautta kunnes joko muuttavat pois tai alkavat itsekin rikollisiksi.

Kun koko teatteri saavuttaa kriittisen pisteen niin onko helpompaa vetää muurit ympärille ja muuttaa seattle vain jättimäiseksi vankilaksi tyyliin escape from NY tai los angeles elokuvien tyyliin?

Tavallinen kansa tästä hulluudesta kärsii eniten. Tietysti rikkaat ostaa palveluita yksityisiltä vartijayrityksiltä.

En usko olevan paluuta mihinkään entisenkaltaisen turvallisempaan normaalitilanteeseen. Kansalaiset sopeutuvat parhaimpana mukaan tai pyrkivät pois alueelta.

[nollatoleranssi]

Tuo Raamattujen ja Amerikan lippujen polttaminen on todella hyvä idea varsinkin kun demokraatit ja aehdokas Sandels tukevat kyseistä liikettä.

Jos joku on Twitterissä niin voisi kysyä aiheesta kristillisten puheenjohtajalta.

[ISO]

Kommunistit onnistuivat pilaamaan neekereiden kampanjan, jossa oikeutetusti vaativat oikeuksiaan poliisin edessä.

Kommunismi on sellainen aate, että se tuhoaa kaikien hyvän ja tuo tilalle väkivaltaa ja kaaosta, ja ihmisoikeusrikkomuksia vailla vertaansa nykyihmisen historiassa.

Yhdysvalloissa kaduilla on enää väkivaltaisimmat hullut, sekä lauma hyödyllisiä idiootteja, jotka nekin tulee pikkuhiljaa järkiinsä.

[nollatoleranssi]

YouTube ja useat somealustat ovat BLM-hengessä poistaneet laajasti näkyviltä mustan naislääkärin videon, jossa hän suositteli ymmärtääkseni samaa lääkettä kuin Trump covidiin. Sensuuria perustellaan valetiedon tms levittämisenä.

Alunperin kyseistä lääkettä suositeltiin laajasti ja Suomessa sitä on samoin annettu potilaille Myöhemmin tuli toisenlaisia tietoa ja yhtäkkiä lääkettä pidettiin vaarallisena, kunnes taas tilanne muuttui kuukautta myöhemmin eli lääke auttaisi potilaita. Pahimpana syynä taidettiin pitää Trumpin ilmoitusta...

Tällä videolla nyt ihmetellään, että miksi toisia valheita saa levittää laajasti ja toisia ei?

Palataan ajassa vuoteen 2014, kun BLM-liike alkoi saada laajempaa suosiota Michael Brown Jr:n kuoleman takia. 18v Brown ammuttiin poliisin toimesta, mutta hänen kohdallaan valehdeltiin kuin häntä olisi ammuttu selkään ja hän olisi pitänyt käsiä ylhäällä. Todellisuudessa Brown hyökkäsi poliisin kimppuun ja yritti riistää aseen. Lopulta poliisi ampui hänet edestäpäin.

The Cop Who Shot Michael Brown Is Exonerated Again (& Again) | Hands Up Don't Shoot Is Still a Lie
https://youtu.be/sn12isaDLBc

Tässä yritettiin saada uusia syytteitä poliisia kohtaan 2020 eli vuoden 2014 tapauksesta. Lisäksi toimittajat ovat täysillä mukana touhussa, kun paikallinen syyttäjä Wesley Bell tyyliin Raija Toiviainen yritti löytää 5kk keinoja syyttää poliisia murhasta Brownin tapauksen takia. Kaikki poliisin taustat yms. pitäisi tutkia tarkkaan. Uusia syytteitä ei voitu nostaa.

Tämä kaikki tapahtui siitä huolimatta, vaikka Obaman aikana tehtiin tarkempi raportti tapauksesta, jossa todettiin Brownin hyökänneen poliisin kimppuun.

Tapaus osoittaa hyvin, miten oikeuslaitos on valjastettu täysin poliittisten voimien mielihalujen kohteeksi.

---

Brownin tapauksen faktat nousivat esiin jo tuolloin ja se herätti ihmetystä, että poliisia vastaan hyökkääminen ei ole mikään ongelma, mutta jos siinä käy rikolliselle huonosti, niin se onkin ongelma.

Tapaus ei ollut itsessään mitenkään ainutlaatuinen, vaan varsinkin näissä tunnetuimmissa tapauksissa on ollut monessa kyse samankaltaisesta tilanteesta eli joko on kamppailu poliisia vastaan tai käyty hyökäten päälle.

[zupi]

(...)

Palataan ajassa vuoteen 2014, kun BLM-liike alkoi saada laajempaa suosiota Michael Brown Jr:n kuoleman takia. 18v Brown ammuttiin poliisin toimesta, mutta hänen kohdallaan valehdeltiin kuin häntä olisi ammuttu selkään ja hän olisi pitänyt käsiä ylhäällä. Todellisuudessa Brown hyökkäsi poliisin kimppuun ja yritti riistää aseen. Lopulta poliisi ampui hänet edestäpäin.

The Cop Who Shot Michael Brown Is Exonerated Again (& Again) | Hands Up Don't Shoot Is Still a Lie
https://youtu.be/sn12isaDLBc

Tässä yritettiin saada uusia syytteitä poliisia kohtaan 2020 eli vuoden 2014 tapauksesta.  (...)

Tapaus osoittaa hyvin, miten oikeuslaitos on valjastettu täysin poliittisten voimien mielihalujen kohteeksi.

(...)

Täysin sairasta, etenkin kun ottaa huomioon, millaisia tapauksia valkoisten kohdalla on sattunut. Nämä ovat siis tuolta aiemmin linkkaamaltani videolta.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1toK3ODe9U

Daniel Shaver:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42277309

Daniel Shaver: Police officer not guilty of murder

Philip Brailsford shot and killed 26-year-old Daniel Shaver in the hallway of a hotel in early 2016.

Bodycam footage of the incident, released after the verdict, showed Mr Shaver on his knees asking officers not to shoot him just before he was killed.

Mr Shaver was shot five times with a semi-automatic rifle as he crawled towards the officers, sobbing.

The police report said he showed guests in his hotel room a rifle he used for work, killing birds.

It later emerged that the rifle was an airsoft or pellet gun, rather than a genuine firearm.

The report also noted that the three occupants of the room had been drinking together, though one man had left by the time police arrived.

Mr Shaver responds by saying: "Please don't shoot me... I'm trying to do what you tell me."

A sobbing Mr Shaver is then told to crawl toward the police, and while doing so, moves his hand towards his waist.

Mr Brailsford shot him five times with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle.

But it also said that Mr Shaver's shorts had fallen around his legs, leaving his underwear exposed. His movement "was also consistent with attempting to pull his shorts up as they were falling off".

"No other purposes for this movement appear to be viable," it said.

No weapon was found on the body, but Mr Bailsford said he believed Mr Shaver was reaching for a weapon in his waistband.

Tony Timpa:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/06/13/excited-delirium-cited-fatal-police-cases-some-say-its-bogus/3178635001/

Timpa called 911 on August 10, 2016, asking for help. He told dispatchers that he had schizophrenia and was off his medication. He was in a parking lot and he was scared.

By the time Dallas police officers arrived, the 32-year-old had become agitated and been placed in handcuffs by security guards from a nearby store.

Body camera footage from the responding officers shows Officer Dustin Dillard holding Timpa facedown and kneeling on his back. At first Timpa yells "You're going to kill me," and attempts to flail around on the ground. Eventually he calms down, moaning occasionally, and then appears to become unconscious.

Dillard remained on top of him for a total of 14 minutes even as officers joked about Timpa being asleep and a paramedic dosed him with the powerful sedative ketamine, body camera footage shows.

He wasn't breathing by the time he was loaded into an ambulance and could not be revived.

The medical examiner ruled his death a homicide and that he suffered, "sudden cardiac death due to the toxic effects of cocaine and physiologic stress associated with physical restraint." The autopsy also said EDS played a role.

None of the officers involved in Timpa's case were fired although two were reprimanded for inappropriate remarks they made at the scene. Three of the five officers were indicted by a grand jury in his death, but those charges were later dropped by the district attorney.

Jeremy Mardis:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34769178

Jeremy Mardis: Driver's hands 'were up' when boy killed

Body camera footage shows that the father of a six-year-old autistic boy was attempting to surrender before police opened fire, killing his son, a lawyer has said.

The two men opened fire on a car in which the family was riding during a traffic stop in Marksville, Louisiana.

Col Michael Edmonson of Louisiana state police said on Monday he was still "figuring out" why the father and son's car was being pursued by police.

Early reports said that the two officers were serving a warrant on Mr Few.

However, Mr Edmonson said there was no evidence a warrant was issued, and that no gun was found at the crime scene.

Referring to the body-camera footage of the incident, Col Edmondson added: "I can tell you, it is the most disturbing thing I've seen, and I'll leave it like that."

Ampujat oli muuten "afroamerikkalaisia". Tässä tapauksessa tuli tuomiot näille poliiseille.

On se kyllä jänskä homma, että tällaisista tapauksista ei nouse minkäänlaista meteliä, mutta kun poliisin kimppuun hyökkääviä taparikollisia narkkarineekereitä tapetaan, niin sitten on koko maailma sekaisin. USA:n poliisin toiminnassa voi olla paljonkin kehitettävää, ainakin koulutuksen suhteen (pitää tosin muistaa minkälaisen porukan kanssa siellä joutuvat tekemisiin), mutta siitähän ei ole minkäänlaista todistetta, että USAn poliisi käyttäytyisi väkivaltaisemmin mustia kuin muita rotuja kohtaan. Itse asiassa eri rotujen rikollisuus huomioon ottaen asia on päinvastainen. Enpä voi taaskaan sanoin kuvailla halveksuntaani vihavasemmistoa kohtaan, kun he kehtaavat ja kykenevät käyttämään tuollaista, varsin vakavaa ja merkittävää asiaa omien poliittisten pyrkimystensä edistämiseen, vieläpä varsin väkivaltaisesti. Ja tämä pätee myös kaikkiin niihin mustiin ja ruskeisiin ympäri maailmaa, jotka törkeän innokkaasti käyttävät tätä tilaisuutta sumeilematta hyväkseen, siis ankaraan perseilyyn. Kyseiset henkilöt paskovat suoraan omien rotutoveriensa päälle, siis niiden, jotka yrittävät elää normaalia ja tuottavaa elämää.

[Urban Moving Systems]

NHL-kausi starttasi uudelleen viime yönä...

Wild's Dumba kneels after speech against racial injustice

Minnesota Wild defenseman Matt Dumba opened the NHL's Western Conference postseason with a heartfelt speech against racial injustice before taking a knee during the U.S. national anthem as members of the Edmonton Oilers and Chicago Blackhawks stood around him.
...

Players for the Oilers and Blackhawks stood in a circle at center ice to honor both front-line workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and those fighting against racial injustice. At the end of a video that highlighted both, the screens flashed a graphic that read "End Racism."

Dumba walked out in a sweatshirt promoting the Hockey Diversity Alliance, an organization founded this year by players of color to combat racial injustice and inequality in the sport.
...

"I'll transition to a topic that's very important to me, my fellow members of the Hockey Diversity Alliance and the NHL. During this pandemic, something unexpected but long overdue occurred. The world woke up to the existence of systematic racism and how deeply rooted it is in our society. For those unaffected by systematic racism or are unaware, I'm sure some of you believe that this topic has garnered too much attention these last couple of months. But let me assure you that it has not. Racism is a man-made creation. All it does is deteriorate from our collective prosperity. Racism is everywhere and we need to fight against it," Dumba said.
...

Dumba took a knee during the U.S. national anthem. No other players joined him. Goalie Malcom Subban of the Blackhawks and defenseman Darnell Nurse of the Oilers, both of whom are Black, stood by his side with their hands on his shoulders. Dumba would stand for the Canadian anthem.
...

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/29578951/western-conference-playoffs-open-wild-matt-dumba-speech-racial-injustice-oilers-blackhawks-face-off

[Mietiskeliä]

Noin kahdeksan aikaa tänä illalla näin Rajatorpassa mielenkiintoisen tapahtumaman. Kun tulin paikanpäälle poliisi oli laittamassa kovin ottein vastaanhangoittelevaa nuorta romanimiestä mustaanmaijaan. Mies laittoi kaikin voimin hanttii ja siksi poliisi käytti miehekkäitä otteita, mutta minusta voimankäyttö ei näyttänyt ylimitoitetulta. Paikalla on oli paljon nuoria, niin suomalaisia,neekereita,ählyjä ja nuorenmiehen vanhemmat. He ja nuoren romanimiehen vahemman protestoivat voimakkaasti poliisin voimankäyttö. Minulla oli kiire ja jouduin pian poistumaan paikalta ja juuri silloin paikalle saapui toinekin poliisipartio. Kun lähin ajamaan autolla, niin näin vastaantulevan vielä yhden poliisipartion pillit päällä. Tunnin päästä menin jälleen tapahtumapaikan ohi ja silloin paikalla oli pari poliisia ja ambulanssi. Ambulansin vieressä näytti olevan myön pari sosiaalityöntekijää. Ilmeisesti potilaalla ei ollut mikään hengenhätä sillä ambulanssilla ei ollut mitään kiirettä lähteä liikkeelle. Tietääkö joku tarkemmin tästä tapauksesta? Sen voi ainakin todeta, että jälleen oli hirveä ulina jälleen päällä kun poliisi yrittää saada roskasakkia järjestykseen.

[Titus]

NHL-kausi starttasi uudelleen viime yönä...

MLB:n puolella Miamin ja Philadelphian joukkueiden pelit on toistaiseksi lepo. Marlineissa taisi olla 18 sairastunutta pari päivää sitten, aika paljon jos rosteri on oliko 30...
Viimeisimpien uutisten mukaan St Louisin jengissä on vastaava rypäs. MLB asiantuntijoiden mukaan kausi voi olla paketissa jo ensi viikolla jos tartuntoja tulee uusiin joukkueisiin.

En epäile hetkeäkään, että NHL pelattaisiin loppuun. Nyt vaan sairastutetaan pelaajia ja ensikauteen valmistautuminen menee reisille.

[kriittinen_ajattelija]

NHL-kausi starttasi uudelleen viime yönä...

MLB:n puolella Miamin ja Philadelphian joukkueiden pelit on toistaiseksi lepo. Marlineissa taisi olla 18 sairastunutta pari päivää sitten, aika paljon jos rosteri on oliko 30...
Viimeisimpien uutisten mukaan St Louisin jengissä on vastaava rypäs. MLB asiantuntijoiden mukaan kausi voi olla paketissa jo ensi viikolla jos tartuntoja tulee uusiin joukkueisiin.

En epäile hetkeäkään, että NHL pelattaisiin loppuun. Nyt vaan sairastutetaan pelaajia ja ensikauteen valmistautuminen menee reisille.

Niino NHL kausi pelataan loppuun Kanadassa jossa on viime aikoina ollut jokseenkin vähän tartuntoja. Lisäksi NHL pelaajat on valkoisia joilla on pienempi tarve mennä strippibaariin jatkoille joka pelin jälkeen toisin kuin mustilla nba:ssa ja nfl:ssä, niin kyllähän se mahdollista on, että änärikausi saadaan loppuun.

[n.n.]

On se kyllä jänskä homma, että tällaisista tapauksista ei nouse minkäänlaista meteliä, mutta kun poliisin kimppuun hyökkääviä taparikollisia narkkarineekereitä tapetaan, niin sitten on koko maailma sekaisin. USA:n poliisin toiminnassa voi olla paljonkin kehitettävää, ainakin koulutuksen suhteen (pitää tosin muistaa minkälaisen porukan kanssa siellä joutuvat tekemisiin), mutta siitähän ei ole minkäänlaista todistetta, että USAn poliisi käyttäytyisi väkivaltaisemmin mustia kuin muita rotuja kohtaan. Itse asiassa eri rotujen rikollisuus huomioon ottaen asia on päinvastainen.

Onhan sitö tutkittu, mutta tulokset ovat usein erilaisia kuin yleensä annetaan ymmärtää. Muistelen yhtä, jossa päädyttiin tulokseen, että mm. valkoisilla poliiseilla on vaikeuksia ymmärtää mustien puhumaan 'slangia' sekä päinvastoin, joka johtaa väärinkäsityksiin molemmin puolin ja tilanteiden eskaloitumiseen.  Eläköön multikulti.

[ikuturso]

Amnestyn merkittävin tunnuspiirre on, että se pyrkii kumoamaan oikeusvaltion: olet syyllinen ellet koko ajan todista ettet ole.

BLM:n kommunismi käy selville jo pelkästään sen kirjaimista: BoLshevisMi - БоЛьшевизМ

Ehdit ensin. Tuosta samasta postauksesta tuli mielleyhtymä: Bolshevism, Leninism, Marxism: BLM.

Mustat vetoavat Raamattuun ja antifantit polttavat niitä. Hienoa. Vähän kuin vetoaisi perustuslakiin samalla kun kaveri vieressä polttaisi lakikirjoja.

En jaksanut katsoa mistä tämä jalkojen pussaaminen tuli, mutta sen tiedän, että Raamatussa kerrotaan Jumalan pojan pesseen opetuslastensa jalkoja. Jos mustat haluavat asettaa itsensä syntisten asemaan ja jalkojensa pesijät Jumalan pojan asemaan, niin jotenkin se ei istu BLM tavoitteisiin. Eikö silloin mustien pitäisi pestä alemman rodun eli valkoisten jalkoja? Olen ymmälläni - kuten koko ajan näiden bolshevikkien tavoitteiden ja etenkin menetelmiensä ja tekojensa oikeuttamisen perustelujen kanssa. Seuraavaksi hadithit ja Koraani. Sitten harekrishnat ja Kama Sutra?

-i-

[Lahti-Saloranta]

Jossain nuo BLM aktivistit polttivat Raamattuja ja Amerikan lippuja. Odota jännittyneenä seuraavan F1 kisan lähtöseremonioita. Sytytetäänkö rovio johon kuskit vuoron perään heittävät Raamatun ja Amerikan lipun.

[zupi]

Alla jälleen yhden vähän fiksumman amerikkalaisen mustan, Glenn C. Louryn näkemyksiä "epätasa-arvosta". Hänkin on yrittänyt / yrittää kovasti tuoda esiin kulttuurin ja käyttäytymistapojen vaikutusta asiaan, mutta vaikeaa tuntuu olevan. Jos vertaa Suomeen, niin täällähän tilanne on monessa suhteessa vielä paljon pahempi. Siis sen suhteen, miten tiettyjen vähemmistöryhmien tilannetta pyritään "korjaamaan", ja miten sitä "ainoaa oikeaa" näkemystä suojellaan.

Glenn Cartman ( )Loury (born September 3, 1948) is an American economist, academic, and author. In 1982, at the age of 33, he became the first black tenured professor of economics in the history of Harvard University. He is the Merton P. Stoltz Professor of the Social Sciences and Professor of Economics at Brown University.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Loury

Glenn C. Loury is currently University Professor, Professor of Economics, and Director of the Institute on Race and Social Division at Boston University. Previously he has taught economics at Harvard, Northwestern and the University of Michigan. He earned a B.A. in Mathematics at Northwestern University and holds a Ph.D. in Economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Professor Loury is a distinguished academic economist. He has made scholarly contributions to the fields of welfare economics, game theory, industrial organization, natural resource economics and the economics of income distribution. He has presented his research before numerous scholarly meetings and academic societies throughout the world. He has been a scholar in residence at Oxford University, Tel Aviv University, the University of Stockholm, the Delhi School of Economics, the Institute for the Human Sciences in Vienna, and the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. Professor Loury has received a Guggenheim Fellowship to support his work. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a Fellow of the Econometric Society, and was elected Vice President of the American Economics Association for 1997.

https://www.bu.edu/irsd/loury/lourybio.htm

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/racial-inequality-in-america-post-jim-crow-segregation

Racial Inequality: A Conceptual Framework

Over the last 40 years, I've explored why, notwithstanding the success of the civil rights movement, the subordinate status of African-Americans persists. Key to my thinking about this intractable problem has been the need to distinguish the role played by discrimination against black people from that played by counterproductive behavioral patterns among blacks.

This puts what is a very sensitive issue rather starkly. Many vocal advocates for racial equality have been loath to consider the possibility that problematic patterns of behavior could be an important factor contributing to our persisting disadvantaged status. Some observers on the right of American politics, meanwhile, take the position that discrimination against blacks is no longer an important determinant of unequal social outcomes (...)

These two positions can be recast as causal narratives. One is what I call the "bias narrative": racism and white supremacy have done us wrong; we can't get ahead until they relent; so we must continue urging the reform of white American society toward that end.

The other is what I call the "development narrative," according to which it is essential to consider how a person comes to acquire those skills, traits, habits, and orientations that foster successful participation in American society. To the extent that African-American youngsters do not have the experiences, are not exposed to the influences, and do not benefit from the resources that foster and facilitate their human development, they fail to achieve their full human potential. This lack of development is what ultimately causes the persistent, stark racial disparities in income, wealth, education, family structure, and much else. (The charts and tables on this and the next several pages offer a glimpse of the magnitude of these disparities.)
(...)

The development narrative puts more onus on the responsibilities of African-Americans to develop our human potential. It is not satisfied with wishful thinking like: "If we could only double the budget for some social program, the homicide rate among young African-American men would be less atrocious." Or, "If we can just get this police department investigated by the Department of Justice, then...." The development narrative asks, Then what? Then it will be safe to walk on the south side of Chicago after midnight?
(...)

What I call "reward bias" (conventional racial discrimination) is now a less significant barrier to the full participation of African-Americans in U.S. society than what I call "development bias." Reward bias focuses on the disadvantageous treatment of black people in formal transactions that limits their rewards for skills and talents presented to the market. Development bias refers to impediments that block access for black people to those resources necessary to develop and refine their talents but that are conveyed via informal social relations. This is where the consideration of culture enters the picture.
(...)

The moral problem presented by reward bias is straightforward and calls for an uncontroversial remedy: laws against overt racial discrimination. Development bias presents a subtler and more insidious ethical challenge that may be difficult to remedy via public policies in any way that garners majoritarian support. Ultimately, development bias deals with some cultural patterns that are characteristic of both a racial minority group and the society at large, while reward bias deals with overt antiblack discriminatory treatment that, even though it has not been fully eliminated, is nevertheless nearly universally condemned.
(...)

Regarding the distinction between reward bias and development bias: to understand persistent racial inequality in America, it is crucial to put relations before transactions. The focus on discriminatory economic transactions may not be sufficient; one will need also to consider the consequences of racially stigmatized social relations. Stigma—the distorted social meanings attaching to "blackness"—inhibits the access that some black people have to those networks of social affiliation where developmental resources are most readily appropriated. This might happen because black people are socially excluded; it might also happen because we choose to be socially withdrawn.

On this view, persistent inequality may no longer be due mainly to a racially discriminatory marketplace, or an administrative state that refuses to reward black talent equally, as was the case in decades past. Rather, today's problem may be due, in large part, to a race-tinged psychology of perception and valuation—a way of seeing black people, and a way of black people seeing themselves, that impedes the acquisition of traits that are valued in the marketplace and are essential for human development.

This can lead to a vicious circle. The status of a racial group as stigmatized in the social imagination—and crucially, in its own self-understanding—can be rationalized and socially reproduced because of that group's subordinate position in the economic order. Moreover, this way of thinking implies that the explanatory categories of "racial discrimination" and "racially distinct behaviors" are not mutually exclusive.
(...)

First, all human development is socially situated and mediated. Human development takes place between people, by way of human interactions, within social institutions—the family, the community, the school, the peer group. Many resources essential to human development, such as the attention that parents give to their children, are not alienable. These resources, for the most part, are not commodities and are not up for sale. Instead, structured connections between individuals create the context within which developmental resources come to be allocated to individual persons. Opportunity travels along the synapses of these social networks.
(...)

Human development begins before birth. The decisions a mother makes—about how closely to attend to her health and nutrition during pregnancy, for instance—will alter the neurological development of her fetus. This, and a myriad of other decisions and actions, all come together to shape the experience of the infant, who will mature one day to become a human being, and about whom it will be said that he or she has this or that much productivity, as reflected in his or her wages or academic test scores.

This productivity, the behavioral and cognitive capacities bearing on a person's social and economic functioning, are not merely the result of a mechanical infusion of material resources. Rather, these are by-products of social processes mediated by networks of human affiliation, and these processes are fundamentally important for understanding persistent racial disparities.

Second, what we call "race" is mainly a social, and only indirectly a biological, phenomenon. (...)

Race, as a feature of a society, rests upon the cultural conceptions about identity held by the people—in America, principally blacks and whites alike—in that society. These are the beliefs that people hold about who they are and about the legitimacy of conducting intimate relations (and not only sexual relations) with racially distinct others. Beliefs of this kind affect the access that people enjoy to those informal resources that individuals require to develop their human potential. Social capital is a critical prerequisite for creating what economists refer to as human capital.

Any conceptual framework for the study of persistent racial inequality is incomplete if it fails to consider the interactions between those social processes ensuring the reproduction of racial difference, on one hand, and those processes facilitating human development, on the other hand.  (...)

Nobody Is Coming to Save Us

I know how difficult it can be to see those connections—it has taken me many years to recognize them. My doctoral dissertation included an essay that was very close to the liberal, "racial bias" narrative. History, I wrote, casts a long shadow. Contemporary racial inequality in America reflects a history of deprivation, discrimination, and dispossession of black people. We can't expect this problem to cure itself. Thus, social justice rightly understood would involve some kind of reparation. I didn't use that word, but I did advocate for some intervention by the state on behalf of the explicit goal of racial equality. Otherwise, I reasoned, we would be stuck indefinitely with the consequences of an unjust past.[9]

That was Glenn Loury circa 1976. By 1985, I had become a Reagan Republican, emphasizing the problems of single-parent families, out-of-wedlock births among blacks, low labor-force participation and educational performance, and high criminal and victimization rates. My favored formulation: there is an enemy without—namely, racism; but there is also an enemy within—namely, behavior patterns inhibiting African-Americans from seizing such opportunities as had come to exist. I stressed to other blacks that if we were ever to achieve equality within American society, we could not simply rely on the antidiscrimination laws and affirmative action; we would also have to address some of these internal behavioral patterns. I still believe this to be the case.
(...)

The majority of African-American children are born to a woman without a husband. It is extremely implausible to imagine how this would be reversed by government policies such as the redistribution of resources. (I am aware of no evidence to this effect.) If this trend is to be reversed at all, it would require a determined effort by African-Americans to think differently about our responsibilities to our children and to one another.

And so I would say to fellow African-Americans: No one is coming to save us! The situation in which we find ourselves is unfair, but this is not a question of justice. Nobody is coming, and, more fundamentally, no one can come into the most intimate relations between our women and men, into the families and neighborhoods where our children are being raised, so as to reorder those cultural institutions in a manner that would be more developmentally constructive.
(kuva)
These matters are ultimately and necessarily in the hands of African-Americans alone. They require facing up to such questions as: Who are we as a people? How should we live with one another? What will we do to honor the sacrifices that our ancestors made to leave us the opportunities we now enjoy? What do we owe our children?

Think about black-on-black crime. Unemployment rates, wealth holdings, residential segregation, and biased policing all may be playing some role in this problem. But young black men are killing one another at extraordinary rates. Notwithstanding the potential beneficial effects of various social policies, no one is coming to save black people from that pathology. If we are not prepared to condemn this contemptible behavior and to cooperate with institutions of civil authority that are legitimately addressing it—if we are unable to recognize that this is a tragic failure with the way that black people are living—we will likely be facing exactly the same issues for many years to come.

"Bias Narratives" Can Take on (Viral) Lives of Their Own

Today, as social-justice warriors take to the streets to protest against racism, it is important to recognize the role played by Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media. Many people get news from online sources that play to the narrative that American society is overwhelmingly populated by white bigots; so incidents that are not at all representative nevertheless become iconic because they go viral. A student finds something resembling a noose near his dorm-room door; a security guard says to someone, "I am unsure whether you belong here. Let me see your ID"; customers are asked to leave a food-service establishment when the manager thinks that their behavior is inconsistent with the establishment's rules. These incidents become national events. It is not simply that something has happened, or that a lot of people know about something having happened. Rather, what matters is that a lot of people know that many people know of the incidents in question.
(kuva)
Idiosyncratic occurrences then become "driving while black," "barbecuing while black," "swimming while black," "shopping while black," "walking while black," and so forth. The narrative of pervasive antiblack racism becomes a trope. When millions of people focus on the same events and reinforce one another in their comments, declaring one's outrage at such incidents becomes a substitute for reasoning about what larger meaning, if any, should be attached to these events.
(...)

As a social scientist, I am loath to operate based on a few anecdotes. For many who embrace the bias narrative, however, that's what is happening. Incidents that are not representative but that are salient within a bias narrative go viral and shape the consciousness of many. The viral social construction of episodes that are not the substance of our lives comes to shape our politics via exaggerated projections onto the surface of our lives. This is not "politics"—if, by that term, we understand mechanisms of give-and-take and persuasion by means of which we govern ourselves. It is, rather, a certain kind of mass delusion.

A big part of the problem is virtue signaling. Only certain kinds of (immoral) people would refuse to go along with these delusions, and too many of us wish not to be thought of as being one of those people, so we avoid expressing skepticism publicly. To do so—to repeat things being said by those who scoff at the outrage of the day and are thought to be racists—risks devaluing one's reputation among "progressives."

My theory of political correctness: a cognitive and intellectual dead end where too many people are motivated to remain silent on critical questions, to voice empty platitudes, or even to say things that they don't believe, all by their need to avoid appearing as though they're on the wrong side of history.

Those Who Downplay Behavioral Disparities Are Bluffing

People on the left of American politics who claim that "white supremacy," "implicit bias," and old-fashioned discrimination account for black disadvantage are daring you to disagree. Their implicit rebuke is that, if you do not agree, you are saying that there's something intrinsically wrong with black people, or with black culture; you must be a racist who thinks that blacks are inferior. Otherwise, they say, how else could one explain the disparities? Behavior? That leads to the accusation that you are "blaming the victim."
(kuva)
But this is a bluff. It is a rhetorical sleight-of-hand, a debater's trick. Why? Consider a statement that "mass incarceration," the high number of blacks in jails and prisons, is self-evidently a sign of American racism. If you respond that it's mainly a sign of the pathological behavior of criminals who happen to be black, you risk being called a racist. Yet common sense, not to mention the evidence, suggests that people are not being arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced because they are black. Rather, prisons are full of people who have broken the law, who have hurt other people, who have violated the basic rules of civility. Prison is not a conspiracy to confine black people. I maintain that no serious person believes that it is. Not really.

The young black men taking one another's lives on the streets of St. Louis, Baltimore, and Chicago are exhibiting behavioral pathology, plain and simple. The people they kill are mainly black, and the families who live with the misery are mainly black. Ascribing that to white racism is laughable. Nobody believes it. Not really.

Consider educational test-score data. Antiracism advocates are, in effect, daring you to say that some groups send their children to the elite universities in outsize numbers compared with other groups because their academic preparation is magnitudes higher and better. Such excellence is an achievement.

One is not born with the knowledge, skills, and academic ability to gain admission into elite colleges. The people who acquire these skills do so through effort. Why do some youngsters acquire the skills while others do not? That is a deep question requiring a serious answer. The simple answer—that this disparity is due to racism, and anyone who says otherwise is a racist—is not serious. Do such disparate outcomes have nothing to do with behavior, with cultural patterns, with what peer groups value, with how people spend their time, with what they identify as being critical to their self-respect? Anyone who believes that is, at best, a fool.
(kuva)

Asians are said, sardonically, to be a "model minority." As a matter of fact, quite a compelling case can be made that "culture" is critical to their success. Jennifer Lee and Min Zhou interviewed Asian families in Southern California, trying to learn how their kids get into Dartmouth, Columbia, and Cornell at such high rates.[12] They found that these families do exhibit cultural patterns, embrace values, adopt practices, engage in behavior, and follow disciplines that orient them so as to facilitate the achievements of their children. It defies common sense, as well as the evidence, to assert that they do not, or, conversely, to assert that the paucity of African-Americans performing at the very top of the intellectual spectrum—I am talking about academic excellence and about the low relative numbers of blacks who exhibit it—has nothing to do with behavior, that it is due entirely to institutional forces. That is an absurdity.

(...) The end of Jim Crow segregation and the advent of equal rights for blacks were game changers. A half-century later, the deep disparities that remain are shameful and are due in large part to the behaviors of black people.

People tout the racial wealth gap as, ipso facto, an indictment of the system—even while black Caribbean and African immigrants are starting businesses, penetrating the professions, and presenting themselves at Ivy League institutions in outsize numbers. They are behaving, although black, like other immigrant groups in our nation's past. True, they are immigrants, not natives, and immigration can be positively selectived. But something is dreadfully wrong when adverse patterns of behavior readily visible in the black American population go without being adequately discussed—to the point that anybody daring to mention them is labeled a racist.
(...)

One more example of how this bluffing can do harm: the affirmative-action debate. We are now on the verge of permanently including African-Americans in elite and selective academic institutions through an openly acknowledged use of different standards. That is horrible—and not because of the Fourteenth Amendment, though the Supreme Court may yet find it so. It's horrible because this is not equality. It is patronizing. It is horrible for black Americans to embrace, and the establishment to adopt, a set of practices rooted in the soft bigotry of low expectations. Yet other than Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, and a few others, there is not even a debate among African-Americans about what should be a first-order question, if the goal is to attain genuine racial equality.

No Responsibility Means No Glory
(...)
You cannot help the hand you are dealt; but you can decide how to play it. To cast oneself as a helpless victim, to filter experience constantly and at every instance through a sieve that catches everything that one has control over while leaving the outcome to invisible, implacable historical forces: something is pathetic about that posture.

The struggle for equal rights for black people, from abolition through the civil rights movement, has always been thought of as a "freedom struggle." But with freedom, rightly understood, comes responsibility. It is past time for all of us to start performing without a net. Rather than lamenting the lack of black billionaires, an outcome ascribed to some invisible force called "racism," one can admit that you will never become a billionaire unless you build a billion-dollar business—which begins by starting a business. One will never win a Nobel Prize in physics unless one learns calculus at the age of 12. What black parents are insisting that their 12-year-old kids learn calculus—those few kids capable of doing so? White people are not responsible for the fact that black people are, or are not, doing this.
(...)

The perspective I am promoting about social capital does not require special, race-targeted social policy. Most policy initiatives aimed at improving the lives of our most disadvantaged citizens should not, and need not, be formulated in explicitly racial terms or understood as a remedy for racial injuries. We have to find what works for disadvantaged people in America, period. If we get that right—if we can fashion an American welfare state consistent with our demographic realities, our own values, and our fiscal capacities—we will go a very long way toward assisting African-Americans to develop their full human potential.

Finding what works is especially pertinent for education policy. Disadvantaged youngsters who live in large cities are poorly served by the majority–minority school districts on which they and their parents must rely. This is a huge area for policy innovation, with respect to charter schools and increased options for parents. Yet black politicians who speak publicly on the issue are virtually unanimous in adopting the hostility toward charter schools that animates the country's largest teachers' union, the National Education Association.  (...)

Are police good or bad for the security and safety of black lives in U.S. cities? It is hard to imagine a more important question. Yet one is hard-pressed to find any effective political debate among African-Americans. Instead, we get the shopworn and ineffective stances that people on the left are taking.

Social-justice warriors are supposed to care about black lives. But if they did, they'd seriously care about securing the safety and property of African-Americans in the South Bronx, the west side of Chicago, and other cities. A real argument is to be had over public safety and the role of the police, and the answers are far from self-evident. Yet I'm not sure that social-justice warriors care about black lives. They seem to care more about remaining in lockstep with fashionable liberal opinion.

Conclusion: Who Are We?

How should we think about the persistence of racial inequality in America? To deny the relevance of behavioral patterns among some black families and communities is folly. To wash one's hands of their problems because of such cultural and behavioral impediments is profoundly unjust. There are no easy answers, but I suggest that the view here is worth considering as a way to account for, and then respond to, an enduring dilemma that confronts and frustrates us still.

Take the poor central-city dwellers who make up perhaps a quarter of the African-American population. The dysfunctional behavior of many in this population does account for much of their failure to progress—and conservatives' demand for greater personal responsibility is necessary and proper. Yet, confronted with the despair, violence, and self-destructive behavior of so many people, it seems morally superficial in the extreme to argue, as many conservatives do, that "those people should just get their acts together; if they did, like many of the poor immigrants, we would not have such a horrific problem in our cities." To the contrary, any morally astute response to the social pathology of American history's losers would have to conclude that, while we cannot change our ignoble past, we must not be indifferent to contemporary suffering issuing directly from that past. Their culture may be implicated in their difficulties, but so is our culture complicit in their troubles; we bear collective responsibility for the form and texture of our social relations.

While we cannot ignore the behavioral problems of the so-called black underclass, we should discuss and react to those problems as if we were talking about our own children, neighbors, and friends. It will require adjusting ways of thinking on both sides of the racial divide. Achieving a well-ordered society, where all members are embraced as being among us, should be the goal. Our failure to do so is an American tragedy. It is a national, not merely a communal, disgrace. Changing the definition of the American "we" is a first step toward rectifying the relational discrimination that afflicts our society, and it is the best path forward in reducing racial inequality.

Tuo kirjoitus oli siis viime vuoden toukokuulta. Alla on otteita vielä 24.6.2020 tehdystä haastattelusta, missä mukaan tulee myös viime aikaiset BLM-perseilyt. Haastattelijana tuossa on Louryn entinen oppilas, Glenn Yu.

https://www.city-journal.org/conversation-on-race-and-equality

(...)
Yu: Hundreds of thousands of people are protesting George Floyd's death, as well as broader issues having to do with the structure of American society. On June 1, President Christina Paxson wrote a letter to the Brown University community indicting the structures of racism and prejudice that she and most on the left claim to lie at the heart of American society. A few days later, you wrote and published your challenge to this letter. Why?

Loury: If my dear colleague, Christina Paxson, professor of economics, as well as president of this university, were simply to have said, "Dear colleagues, I have been pondering the events of the last few days and weeks, and it has brought me to a set of conclusions that I want to share with you from my heart," and then she proceeded to do so, I would not have written to my friend, nor would I have made public what I wrote, which was printed in City Journal. I wouldn't have done it because she's entitled to her opinion. But that's not what happened.

What happened was a letter signed by the president and cosigned by the provost. It was signed by the senior vice president for administration, by the senior vice president for finance, by the person in charge of advancement and development for the university. It was signed by the university's general counsel, by the vice president for diversity and inclusion, and by every other functionary all the way down the line to the dean of the School of Public Health. They signed a political letter.

These events don't speak for themselves. Americans disagree about Black Lives Matter. Black Lives Matter is not axiomatic. The group represents a thrust in American politics. We can talk about it. I'm not without sympathy for the struggle for racial justice, but I have disputes with people when it comes to interpreting what's going on in American cities. The letter doesn't mention the fact that it's dangerous on the streets of many inner-city neighborhoods where police have to operate every day, that there are a lot of weapons out there, or that the homicide rate is extraordinarily high and that most of the people committing the homicides in these places are black.

Now, imagine that I wrote not a Left letter, but a Right letter: "I think the blacks are complaining too much." Suppose I wrote that letter and I had everybody in the administration sign it. So it's a political statement. It may be a very sympathetic and a very persuasive statement, but it's political! Universities ought not to be political in this sense. When I received that letter, signed by everybody on the payroll of this university who gets paid above $400,000 a year, I thought: "This is thought-policing." They're telling us what to think. They're saying that this is what "Brown values" require one to think. They're speaking about a "We" with a capital W, and it's including everybody.

Well, it didn't include me! So, I object. I object to the soft tyranny of having political postures put forward as self-evident truths to which every decent member of this community should subscribe. I object to that. That's the last thing that a university should be doing. It's malpractice. It is administrative malpractice of this precious institution to be swept along by political fad and fancy, and then demand the assent of every administrator, in lockstep, without any dispute among themselves. This is horrible, I thought. I thought the propagation of such groupthink at our university was just horrible.

I know this will seem a bit hysterical, but I felt violated by the letter, because it was trying to tell me what to think. And not only that. It was also, in effect, telling me what I can say in my classes without contravening "Brown values." It was telling me what I can and cannot write, what I can and cannot pronounce in my public statements if I wish to remain a member in good standing in this community. That is an outrage, in my opinion.

Yu: President Paxson has a point of view about racism—that it is structural. How does your definition of racism conflict with that definition? If structural racism is not responsible for levels of crime and poverty and black communities, what is?

Loury: Well, I want to be very respectful because the discourse has taken a certain turn and people use these words casually but let me try the following. Something like seven in ten children born to an African-American woman in this country are born to a woman who doesn't have a husband. I don't have an opinion about whether that's right or wrong morally. But I do have a question about whether that's at all relevant to aggressive behavior by male adolescents in American cities. I'm not making a claim that it is. But let's just say I'm asserting that it could be. Suppose it's the case that most incidents where police violence has been used against black men are incidents where there was resistance to arrest. No, you did not hear me say that his resisting arrest justified killing him. But aggressive behavior is relevant to the dynamic of social interaction that may result in him being killed.

People cry, "structural racism." Is that why the homicide rate is an order of magnitude higher among young black men? They say structural racism. Is that why the SAT test-score gap is as big as it is? They say structural racism. Is that why two in three black American kids are born to women without a husband? Is it all about structural racism? Is everything structural racism? It has become a tautology explaining everything. All racial disparities are due to structural racism, evidently. Covid-19 comes along and there's a disparity in the health incidence. It's due to structural racism. They're naming partners at a New York City law firm and there are few black faces. Structural racism. They're admitting people to specialized exam schools in New York City and the Asians do better. This has to be structural racism, with a twist—the twist being that this time, the structural racism somehow comes out favoring the Asians.

This is not social science. This is propaganda. It's religion. People are trying to win arguments by using words as if they were weapons. (...)

Structural racism, by contrast, is a bluff. It's not an engagement with history. It's a bullying tactic. In effect, it's telling you to shut up.

Take structural racism's narrative of incarceration. It's supposed to be self-evident that if there's a racial disparity in the incidence of punishment from law-breaking, then the law is illegitimate. Well, an alternative hypothesis is that, for reasons that we could perhaps spend lots of time pursuing, behaviors are different. Behaviors that bear on lawbreaking are different between races, on average. Violence is one behavior, but it's not the only one I'm talking about. People have tried to do these studies. They've examined whether policing practices can accommodate disparity in arrest rates. They've examined whether court dispositions are somehow structurally biased, finding blacks guilty when whites would have been found innocent; whether judges systematically pronounce longer sentences for blacks than for whites. The net finding was no.

(...) There are many disparities, and for every disparity, there are alternative explanations that one can bring to bear, but structural racism doesn't even attempt to provide an explanation. It attempts to maneuver you into a corner rhetorically so that you must concede it's not the fault of the people who suffered the condition at hand.

Yu: In a lecture you gave for the Watson Institute a few years ago, you detail a formative moment for you, a meeting you had in Washington with black leaders years ago wherein you made Coretta Scott King cry. In your description of that event, you said that you went in there thinking that once they knew the facts, they would have to agree with you. But they didn't. Do people disagree with you because they don't have the same information or statistics as you? Or are these differences ideological?

Loury: Everybody pretty much has the same information available to them, but people are very selective of what information they avail themselves. There's also a confirmation-bias problem that we all suffer from, where we want to pay attention to evidence that confirms our prior beliefs and disattend evidence that contradicts them.

Let's take the question of the police use of lethal force. Do they use lethal force in a manner that is systematically racially biased? There are studies out there, and it's not the kind of question you're going to definitively answer with a single study, but the accumulation of people's careful investigations should bear on what we think about the question. Nevertheless, I don't think people care what's in the appendices of these studies. I don't think they care what attention went into the accumulation of the data set at the basis of the statistical analysis. I think they cherry-pick.

Here's Roland Fryer, for instance, who has this controversial paper regarding police use of force in American cities, where he finds no racial differences between police use of lethal force once you've controlled for the circumstances of the situation. As I follow the discussion on Econ Twitter, Facebook, and popular media, Fryer is portrayed in two distinct ways. He is either, from a Heather Mac Donald point of view, a white knight riding in with the facts that finally prove what she's been saying all along, or he's a traitor sensationalist who wants to get famous by telling the white people what they want to hear. After some engagement with the details, I personally think Fryer has the better of the arguments. I think he raises very legitimate questions about how important the circumstances are of each encounter that lead police officers to use deadly force.

But to answer your question: Is disagreement factual or ideological? The answer is it's ideological.

Yu: Then how do we convince people? In your personal experience, have you ever convinced anyone?

Loury: I cannot say that I have. Maybe I'm talking to the wrong people. Maybe if I talked often enough to people who really disagreed with me, I would have created a broad enough sample of encounters such that sometimes I would have succeeded. Maybe I haven't given myself the opportunity to persuade. I'm conceding that that's a possibility.

Yu: I've had conversations in the past few weeks that have ended very poorly; conversations that have spiraled out of control, where I'm suddenly a racist, so I'm on damage control. I just don't know how to reach people in a meaningful way, and that's very disturbing to me.

Loury: It is disturbing. I'm not a seer. My mouth is not a prayer book. I only say what I say based on my subjective assessment of it all. But it may be that, for a while anyway, there's not going to be a whole lot of effective talking. It may well be that we have to imagine a world where effective deliberation and consensus is not within reach for us, and we're going to have to manage that situation. It could get very bad. It could go to violence. This is what Sam Harris always says, and he's got a point. He says that if we can't reason together, then the only alternative for dispute resolution is violence.

I don't know if you saw my piece in Quillette about the looting and the rioting, but I pick up these pieces published in the New York Times, respectable left-wing journals. I'm reading them, and the writer is saying, "America was founded on looting. What did you think the Boston Tea Party was?" Or, "You're talking about looting when George Floyd lies dead? Oh, I see, black lives don't matter as much as property." These are, to my mind, incomprehensibly idiotic. I don't mean that to cast aspersions. The civilization that we all enjoy rests upon a very fragile foundation. Look. I'm in my backyard. It's very nice. I've got a lot of space. There's a fence. The birds come. I have a lawn. It's mine!

Now, if a homeless person comes and squats in my backyard, I call the police. I have him removed, forcibly. There should be no lack of clarity about whether George Floyd's death somehow excuses or justifies burning a bodega to the ground that a Muslim immigrant spends his whole life building. Being confused about that, equivocating about that, splitting the difference about that—I don't understand how we're going to have a reasoned discussion. My thoughts go back to, protect civilization. Again, I know how that sounds. It's hyperbolic. It's exaggerated—but only a little! My gut response is that this is not the time for argument. This is the time to protect civilization and protect institutions. When people start toppling statues of Abraham Lincoln and spray-painting on statues of George Washington, "a slave owner," things fall apart. The center cannot hold. We teeter on the brink of catastrophe.

Yu: What about the Ferguson Effect?

Loury: I think Fryer's studies give us good evidence of the Ferguson Effect's validity. This most recent paper is only one study, but the numbers are stunning. It looks at Ferguson, Riverside, Chicago, and Baltimore as cities where there were Michael Brown- or Freddie Gray-type viral incidents of police brutality, which caused a big public stir that then drew in a federal investigation of each respective local police department. He compares those to other cities, similar in demography and economic structure, but where there was no viral incident, or there was a viral incident, but it was not followed by an investigation by the federal government of the local department.

Fryer finds that violent crime is significantly higher in those cities that were investigated than it is in comparable cities in the years after the federal investigations. It's a very comprehensive regression-discontinuity study. It's not perfect, but I think it's compelling. They estimate that these investigations caused an additional 900 homicides and an additional 30,000 or so felonies. Why? Because, he says, the amount of policing activity in those places diminished significantly with the onset of the federal inquiry, which he shows by documenting the decrease in stops made by police in those places. So he's got two findings, really. First: police engagement with citizens seems to be sensitive to the extent to which police are placed in jeopardy by the scrutiny of the federal government. Second: the amount of violent crime in those places depends on the amount of police engagement because violent crime goes up when police engagement goes down. That's an association, not a demonstration of causality, but it's a very suggestive association.

(...)
Loury:
(...)
Things are not what they were in 1860, in 1910, in 1950, or even in 1980. Things are different now. Now, you get fired from your job if you're a prominent person if you merely use the wrong word. Now, if you are a university administrator known to be hostile to affirmative action, your chances of employment outside of Liberty University in Virginia are essentially nil. (...)

Yu: Well, what if you're growing up in Chicago? You've got crime all around you. No one in your family can hold down a job. There's lead in the walls. School is a waste of time for six hours a day. There are no books in your house. That's certainly not the same upbringing that I had.

Loury: Sure, it's not. But what's racial about that? Aren't there white people in that situation? And Latinos? As I said, if structural racism explains everything, then it doesn't explain anything. There's lead in the water because the municipality hasn't been properly maintained; because the tax base is too scant to be able to support the kind of infrastructure investment needed to get decent water delivered to people, and the teachers' union blocked the effort to try to reform the schools to charter schools, and the local school district is strapped because of the low values of the properties surrounding it, and the state is unwilling to help.

Those are all problems. I agree with you that those are problems, but they are American problems. To construe them as the consequence of something called structural racism, in my opinion, is not only to get causality wrong but, more importantly, to impede the kind of politics that would end up effectively addressing that problem, which would be a working-class politics on behalf of a decent provisioning to Americans, period. I don't dispute the fact that there's unequal opportunity in society.
(...)

Yu: If there's no available policy intervention, and there's also no way we can change people's minds, then is it hopeless? Is disparity always going to be the case?

Loury: Yes. My answer is it's hopeless. But let me rephrase the question, and I'm channeling Thomas Sowell now. You have two alternatives. You can live with disparities, or you can live in totalitarianism. Again, hyperbolic, I know. No, I'm not talking about Eastern Europe circa 1960, but look at it this way: there can't be a disparity without somebody being on top. People don't recognize this.

What groups are on top? What about the Jews? You could say, "There are too many Jews in positions of influence." If there are too few black lawyers who are partners in big law firms, doesn't it follow that are too many Jews who are partners at these big firms? If there are too few blacks who are professors of mechanical engineering at places like Carnegie Mellon, why aren't there too many Korean professors at these places?

If the system is structured to deny the potentiality of black humanity, then the system is structured as to affirm the humanity of the particular groups that are overrepresented in the prized venues of American life. People don't realize that they're playing with fire when they take these disparities as ipso facto evidence of systemic failure. They insist on wholesale interventions into people's exercise of their liberty in order to enact a reduction or elimination of disparities, yet a world without any disparities is a world where you don't have so many—name your group—who've got so much money or so many prizes. There are only so many positions. There is no under-representation without over-representation. This is arithmetic.

What is the nature of the world that we live in? Why would I ever expect that there would be parity across the board between ethnic, racial, cultural, and ancestral population groups in an open society? It's a contradiction because difference is a very fact of groupness. What do I mean by a group? Well, it's genes, to some degree; it's culture; it's networks of social affiliation, of intermarriage and kinship. I mean the shared narrative, the same hopes, the dreams, the stories. I mean the practices of parenting and filial piety and whatever else there might be.

A group is a group. It has characteristics. Those characteristics matter for whether you play in the NBA. They matter for whether you learn to master the violin or the piano. They matter for whether you pursue technical subjects or choose to become a humanist or a scientist. They matter for the food that you eat. They matter for how many children you raise and how you raise them. They matter as to the age when you first have sex. They matter for all those things, and I think everyone would agree with that.

But now you're telling me that they don't matter for who becomes a partner in a law firm? They don't matter for who becomes a chair in the Philosophy Department somewhere? Groupness implies disparity because groupness, if taken seriously, implies differences in ways of living life. Not everybody wants to play the fiddle. Not everybody wants to dunk a basketball. Not everybody is frightened to death that their parents are going to be disappointed with them if they come home with an A-minus. Not everybody is susceptible to being swayed into a social affiliation that requires them to commit a violent crime in order to prove their bona fides. Groups differ. Groups are not evenly distributed across society. That's inevitable. If you insist that those be flattened, you're only going to be able to succeed by imposing a totalitarian regime that monitors everything and jiggers everything, recomputing and refiguring things until we've got the same number of blacks in proportion to their population and the same number of second-generation Vietnamese immigrants in proportion to their population being admitted to Caltech or the Bronx High School of Science. I don't want to live in that world.

Yu: Clearly, we don't want equality of outcome. But what about equality of opportunity?

Loury: Well, that's the ideal. And, insofar as we can give people opportunity through public action—for example, funding schools—yes, I think we should do so. But, insofar as opportunity is also a consequence of informal associations among people—for example, what goes on in their families—again, I repeat: You can get equality only at the cost of tyranny. You're going to make every parent spend the same amount of time reading to their kid? Is every parent going to make sure that the television is turned off and make sure that the kid is studying at night to the same degree? No, they're not. Some parents are going to do more. The kids who have parents who are attendant to the nutrition of their child during the gestation period before they're born, who read to the child while the child is in the crib, who insist that their child does their homework and monitors the kind of friends have and knows where they are at 10 o'clock on any given night—those kids have greater opportunity. How are you going to equalize that?

[Faidros.]

Laitanpa nyt kuitenkin. F1-kuski Kevin Magnussen on virallisesti ilmoittanut, ettei enää aio polvistua BLM mielenilmauksissa.
Ei halua tukea BLM:n poliittisia aatteita.
Suoraselkäinen tanskalainen ja vielä uskaltaa sanoa sen julkisesti!

[Uuno Nuivanen]

^ Onpa noita muitakin. Räkä ei vutkelmille polvistele. 

Magnussen liittyi kuuden muun kuljettajan joukkoon, jotka eivät ole polvistuneet ennen kisojen alkua. Kyseiset kuljettajat ovat Kimi Räikkönen, Charles Leclerc, Max Verstappen, Daniil Kvjat, Carlos Sainz Jr. ja Antonio Giovinazzi.

https://www.iltalehti.fi/formulat/a/73aed19c-ee57-46a0-9a17-eb2c3a62226c

[Mr.Reese]

Veikkaan, että muutkin kuskit alkaa kyllästyä tuohon pelleilyyn kauden mittaan.

[ikuturso]

Veikkaan, että muutkin kuskit alkaa kyllästyä tuohon pelleilyyn kauden mittaan.

Ja jos pruukaa olla polvissa vähän nivelrikkoa niin kuin allekirjoittaneella, niin siinä kaasujalan herkkyys kärsii kun konttaa ennen ajosuoritusta. Naks ja raks.

-i-

[zupi]

Menköön tähän ketjuun, kun sivuaa BLM-perseilyäkin.

[tweet]1290313975859568640[/tweet]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/dawn-of-the-woke-11596385455

Dawn of the Woke

Joe McCarthy was a B-movie monster. Today's cancel culture is more like a zombie apocalypse.

I was a Senate page boy for a couple of summers in the early Eisenhower years. Joe McCarthy was in full cry. (...)

What's happening on the American left—with surreal rapidity, like the fall of France in 1940—is sinister. Wokeness and the cancel culture represent not idealism but virtue gone clinically insane. Look up the word hysteria: "a psychological disorder whose symptoms include . . . shallow, volatile emotions, and overdramatic or attention-seeking behavior."

The indignant woke, who imagine themselves to be righteously awake and laying the foundations for a more just and humane world, ought to pause—to draw back for a moment, and consider the possibility that they are, as it were, fast asleep, caught up in strange, agitated dreams: that they have become a mass joined in a cult of self-righteousness, moral vanity and privilege. One of these days, they will have to be deprogrammed and led back to the real world. Woke institutions will need to be fumigated.

The woke are especially obsessed with two areas—sex and race.  (...) Men become women on their own say-so, and may bear children, if they choose: Death to the one who denies it! Even pronouns have become narcissistically discretionary.

As for race: In the eyes of the woke—and in most media accounts—this summer's eruptions (protests, demonstrations, riots, precinct-house occupations, and the "summer of love" in Seattle's "occupied protest") have been "overwhelmingly peaceful." It's not really true, but the woke are addicted to the meme of their own harmlessness, and so they will it into truth. Destruction, in fact, has been extensive—and inexcusable. Those hardest hit have been residents and shopkeepers in black and other minority neighborhoods that are left in the wreckage after those who did the damage—among them many white anarchists and antifa people—have gone back to their parents' basements.

Michael Tracey, a journalist from Jersey City, N.J., returned from a monthlong tour of cities around the country, inspecting the damage. He reported, in an article on the website UnHerd: "From large metro areas like Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul, to small and mid-sized cities like Fort Wayne, Indiana and Green Bay, Wisconsin, the number of boarded up, damaged or destroyed buildings I have personally observed—commercial, civic, and residential—is staggering. Keeping exact count is impossible."

McCarthyism and the cancel culture—which is the military wing of wokeness—are most alike in their power to conjure fear. It was fear that kept McCarthy up and running for several years, and it is fear—of losing a job, losing an assistant professorship, losing one's good name, one's friends, fear of saying the wrong thing and bringing down ruin on one's head, fear not to sign a party-line faculty petition—that fortifies and sustains the cancelers.

What can be done? (...) But the odds are against such a miracle. The woke, like hyenas, hunt in packs, and those in authority are craven.

(...) Wokeness will prove harder to kill than McCarthyism. McCarthy was a B-movie monster. Wokeness is a zombie apocalypse.

Mr. Morrow is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_Morrow

Lance Morrow (born September 21, 1939, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) is an American essayist and writer, chiefly for Time magazine,[1] as well as the author of several books. He won the 1981 National Magazine Award for Essay and Criticism and was a finalist for the same award in 1991. He has the distinction of writing more "Man of the Year" articles than any other writer in the magazine's history and has appeared on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson and The O'Reilly Factor. He is a former professor of journalism and University Professor at Boston University.

[S.T.]

Ensimmäinen vartalokameravideo on julkaistu Georgen pidätyksestä. George ei ole kauhean yhteistyöhaluinen, vastustaa, sekoilee ja valehtelee poliisimiehille. Video ei ole eduksi BLM-liikkeelle tai demokraattien mellakoille.

Daily Mail Youtube

[ikuturso]

Ensimmäinen vartalokameravideo on julkaistu Georgen pidätyksestä. George ei ole kauhean yhteistyöhaluinen, vastustaa, sekoilee ja valehtelee poliisimiehille. Video ei ole eduksi BLM-liikkeelle tai demokraattien mellakoille.

Daily Mail Youtube

Wow. Johtuen poliisin rakenteellisesta rasismista, iso mies itkee, kun pelkää tulevansa ammutuksi, kun pyydetään ulos autosta. Sitten loppu onkin "I'm not bad guy" ja "I'm not that kind of guy", kunnes miestä koitetaan laittaa autoon, josta poliisi lupaa avata kaikki ikkunat, niin silloin alkaa jo "Man, I can't breathe man".

Iso hatunnosto USA:n poliiseille, kun tekevät tuollaista työtä. Vaara on läsnä jokaisessa pidätyksessä ja puuttumisessa pieniinkin rikkeisiin.

-i-