Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread

[iiandyiiii]

@Steophan

So, when have black people been interned based solely on their ancestry?

During slavery and afterwards, when black people were routinely arrested and beaten for no reason. So for hundreds of years.

When have they been moved to reservations?

For most of American history, black Americans did not have the freedom to live where they want and were consigned to unwanted parts of localities. So, for hundreds of years.

When have their been attempted (and sometimes successful) genocides of them?

In the reprisals during the aftermath of slave rebellions, and in episodes of mass lynchings that literally destroyed entire towns and communities. And this is on top of centuries of brutal efforts to stamp out any attempt at a shared culture for black Americans. So for hundreds of years.

[Gary_Kumquat]

@Smapti

The part where I believe slavery shouldn’t be practiced in the first place.

Wonderful. And in a world where it is practised what do you believe slaves should do.

[iiandyiiii]

@Smapti

The part where I believe slavery shouldn’t be practiced in the first place.

Why do you believe slavery shouldn’t be practiced?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

This is twice in several weeks that we’ve had a racist assert that things after 1865 were just fine for African Americans. Is there some white supremacist website at which these guys are convincing one another that this is true?

[Fear_Itself]

Linked video depicts nude woman with only a towel, probably NSFW.

Illegal home invasion by Colorado police; woman wearing only a towel handcuffed, then released without charges. One victim records the encounter on a cell phone; the accused officer’s body cam mysteriously has no video. Internal affairs determines there was no probable cause, and the home entry was illegal.

[dasmoocher]

@iiandyiiii

For most of American history, black Americans did not have the freedom to live where they want and were consigned to unwanted parts of localities. So, for hundreds of years.

This article may be of interest:

The long, painful and repetitive history of how Baltimore became Baltimore.

And the really terrible irony — which brings us back to Baltimore today — is that each of these shocks further diminished the capacity of low-income urban black communities to recover from the one that came next. It’s an irony, a fundamental urban inequality, created over the years by active decisions and government policies that have undermined the same people and sapped them of their ability to rebuild, that have again and again dismantled the same communities, each time making them socially, economically, and politically weaker.
…
In Fullilove’s research on urban renewal, 67 percent of people displaced by such demolition projects nationwide were black. Those people who moved lost their social networks as well as their homes. Over time, deindustrialization took their decent blue-collar jobs, too. And because we never invested in the kind of education low-income urban communities would need to find work in a post-industrial world, low-skilled workers today are left with worse prospects today than they had two generations ago.
…
It’s little wonder, then, that dealing drugs might look like a viable way to keep a family afloat in a neighborhood with soaring unemployment. It’s no wonder that incarceration would follow, along with family breakdown. And it’s no great surprise that Baltimore’s deeply troubled neighborhoods today are many of the same ones that were deemed “undesirable” 75 years ago.
…
The historic scale of these forces also helps to explain why even a city with a black mayor and a black police chief isn’t immune to racial unrest. Several minority elected officials in 2015 can’t be a corrective to decades of compounding policy. Nor can a few pilot projects and fleeting government grants.

[dasmoocher]

@iiandyiiii

Why do you believe slavery shouldn’t be practiced?

But it was fine in the 19th century, according to Smapti, right?

[Steophan]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

This is twice in several weeks that we’ve had a racist assert that things after 1865 were just fine for African Americans. Is there some white supremacist website at which these guys are convincing one another that this is true?

There’s a bit of a gap between “just fine” and “actual genocide”.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@dasmoocher

This article may be of interest:

The long, painful and repetitive history of how Baltimore became Baltimore.

But all ‘those people’ need to do is change their “culture”. Problem solved!

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Steophan

There’s a bit of a gap between “just fine” and “actual genocide”.

To be fair, what’s being described isn’t so much a Germany-style genocide, but more of a Yugoslavia-style ethnic cleansing.

It’s like comparing apples to slightly smaller apples.

[Smapti]

@dasmoocher

But it was fine in the 19th century, according to Smapti, right?

It was legal in the 19th century, protected by state and federal law, and upheld by the Supreme Court. Eventually, we as a nation decided that was not an acceptable state of affairs and amended the Constitution to change that.

[Smapti]

@iiandyiiii

Why do you believe slavery shouldn’t be practiced?

Because it’s not conducive to promoting individual rights and freedoms.

@Gary_Kumquat

Wonderful. And in a world where it is practised what do you believe slaves should do.

Attempt to gain their freedom to the extent that the law allows them to and in the meantime fulfill their obligations under the law.

[Fear_Itself]

@Smapti

Because it’s not conducive to promoting individual rights and freedoms.

Attempt to gain their freedom to the extent that the law allows them to and in the meantime fulfill their obligations under the law.

That is just evil. Why can’t slaves defend their individual rights and freedoms like cops can?

[Smapti]

@Fear_Itself

Why can’t slaves defend their individual rights and freedoms like cops can?

Slaves, by definition, don’t have individual rights and freedoms, which is why I’m opposed to slavery.

[Czarcasm]

@Smapti

Attempt to gain their freedom to the extent that the law allows them to and in the meantime fulfill their obligations under the law.

So as long as the law says it’s o.k. to own people, those that are enslaved should just accept it? If it came to pass that you became a legal slave and were separated from your family, what would you do?

[Smapti]

@Czarcasm

So as long as the law says it’s o.k. to own people, those that are enslaved should just accept it? If it came to pass that you became a legal slave and were separated from your family, what would you do?

Then I’d be a slave.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Smapti

Slaves, by definition, don’t have individual rights and freedoms, which is why I’m opposed to slavery.

This guy is like the horribly damaged Nomad probe from Star Trek, but with a fail safe mechanism that prevents him from encountering contradictory internal directives.

[iiandyiiii]

@Smapti

Because it’s not conducive to promoting individual rights and freedoms.

Accepting one’s own enslavement (or the enslavement of others) is not “conducive to promoting individual rights and freedoms” – so why would you advocate that a slave accept their own enslavement and not try to escape to a slavery-free region?

[Smapti]

@iiandyiiii

Accepting one’s own enslavement (or the enslavement of others) is not “conducive to promoting individual rights and freedoms” – so why would you advocate that a slave accept their own enslavement and not try to escape to a slavery-free region?

Because disagreeing with a law doesn’t mean you get to ignore it. The law must be obeyed whether you like it or not - to believe otherwise would mean accepting that people who believe in things you don’t like are free to ignore the laws that you support.

[Fear_Itself]

@Smapti

Slaves, by definition, don’t have individual rights and freedoms, which is why I’m opposed to slavery.

So only government, by its laws, can confer human rights and freedoms?