I'd like to hear a Republican's retort to Beto's "take a knee" speech.

[monstro]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

There is a fairly consistent distinction to be made between, say, Martin Luther King’s actions, or Rosa Park’s actions, on the one hand, and the NFL player actions on the other. There’s a consistent way to approve of the former while disapproving of the latter.

I don’t know what others call it, but I think of it as the Victor’s Distinction.

That is, you can approve of Parks and King, because they won. Their civil rights struggle is safely in the past, and society has agreed that what they did was great and that they were heroes. Today if you blame Parks or King, you experience some serious social pushback. So if you adopt the Victor’s Distinction, you approve of what they did.

Colin Kaepernick? He hasn’t won yet. Black Lives Matter? The people who take down statues? They’re in the middle of their struggle, and you can condemn them without universal social pushback. So the Victor’s Distinction doesn’t require you to approve of them: you can criticize them all you like.

It’s convenient and consistent. Fifty years ago, those who adopted the Victor’s Distinction could approve of Harriet Tubman while disapproving of MLK, pointing out how he stirred up trouble in otherwise peaceful communities. A hundred and fifty years ago, those who adopted the Victor’s Distinction could approve of the Boston Tea Party while condemning Harriet Tubman for violating property rights–I mean, sure, maybe slavery should end some day, but stealing people from plantations wasn’t helping the cause at all. And in 1773 I’m certain there were people who approved of Pilgrims who left the land they were bonded to, but wagged their fingers at the hooligans throwing perfectly good tea into the Boston Harbor.

This is such an incredible post!!

[drad_dog]

@Shodan

OK, now I’ve reconsidered it. So now I will try again.

Blacks commit almost three times as much violent crime as would be expected from their representation in the US populace.
I thought we did this one already.

If a group is disproportionately likely to engage in the kind of street-level crime, and to live in areas where other people are committing street-level crime, and are taught to distrust the police, and have been lied to by political activists hungry for money and attention, then it is understandable that they, or a friend/cousin/son/homie, would report on a survey that the police mistreated them - even if the large majority of such cases would be something that a neutral observer would not class as mistreatment.
BLM started because of police shootings like Michael Brown and things like that. Which kind of undercuts your point - if we examine cases like Michael Brown and Jamar Clarke and Eric Garner and many others, we find that in the vast majority of cases, the shootings were entirely justified. Of the remaining cases, they have little to nothing to do with race, and the police tend to get sanctioned, up to and including termination of job and criminal prosecution (subject to the same standards as every other accused person - “innocent until proven guilty” and all that).

Regards,
Shodan

When you say “neutral” observer don’t you mean “neutral colored” observer?

[elucidator]

Crayola had it as “flesh”, really just a dull and uninteresting form of beige.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@monstro

This is such an incredible post!!

@JKellyMap

Fantastic post.

Thanks, y’all. This phenomenon seems so straightforward to me, now that I see it, that surely someone else has written about it before me and has a catchier name for it.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@Shodan

If a group is disproportionately likely to engage in the kind of street-level crime, and to live in areas where other people are committing street-level crime, and are taught to distrust the police, and have been lied to by political activists hungry for money and attention, then it is understandable that they, or a friend/cousin/son/homie, would report on a survey that the police mistreated them - even if the large majority of such cases would be something that a neutral observer would not class as mistreatment.

…Of course, this is belied somewhat by the fairly regular videos and reports you get showing obscene mistreatment of African-American people by the police. Things like flipping a 13-year-old girl over her desk and slamming her to the ground, throwing a pregnant woman onto her stomach, beating a protester then charging him for bleeding on your clothes… Have you not heard about this shit? It’s pretty prevalent!

Honestly, there’s something truly disgusting about this - hearing that a group of people which happens to be the target of constant racism complains consistently about police mistreatment, you decide “they’re just making it up” apropos of basically fucking nothing. That’s gross, dude. That’s legitimately gross.

BLM started because of police shootings like Michael Brown and things like that. Which kind of undercuts your point - if we examine cases like Michael Brown and Jamar Clarke and Eric Garner and many others, we find that in the vast majority of cases, the shootings were entirely justified.

You brought up one case where the police were in the right, one case where witnesses dispute the police’s story, and one case where the police were indisputably in the wrong. Nice going, even your own cherry-picked examples don’t back up your point.

Of the remaining cases, they have little to nothing to do with race, and the police tend to get sanctioned, up to and including termination of job and criminal prosecution (subject to the same standards as every other accused person - “innocent until proven guilty” and all that).

If I roll my car up to a playground, take out a pistol, and shoot a 12-year-old with a capgun in his shorts (all caught on video), do you think I’ll be declared “not guilty”? If I’m talking to someone at a crosswalk, they mention they have a gun, and I freak out and shoot them, do you think I’ll have any rational defense for that shooting? These people are not getting away with murder because they’re “not proven guilty”. They’re getting away with murder because the standard for lethal force for police officers is staggeringly low.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@iiandyiiii

I have no doubt that a hypothetical explanation can be imagined that explains why black people’s accuracy can’t be trusted as much as white people’s. It’s just as easy to come up with one that explains why the accuracy of black people on this would be far more accurate than white people. But without mind-reading, this is all little more than guessing.

I disagree. You sometimes need mindreading to ascertain people’s thoughts in a given instance. But if you’re talking about broad patterns that hold true in aggregate, factors which account for differences in percentages between different groups and different situations, that has zero to do with mindreading. It’s just about basic human nature.

[iiandyiiii]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

I disagree. You sometimes need mindreading to ascertain people’s thoughts in a given instance. But if you’re talking about broad patterns that hold true in aggregate, factors which account for differences in percentages between different groups and different situations, that has zero to do with mindreading. It’s just about basic human nature.

I don’t believe the explanations offered qualify – they were either pure opinion (i.e. that they’re consistently lied to) or unconnected to the potential for accuracy of the polling.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

OK, I’m going to leave it here.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

Yeah, I bet you are.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

Glad you could share that. Adds a lot.

[elucidator]

“Basic human nature”, eh? Well, OK, isn’t that collective? As noted political philosopher Eddard Stark said, the lone wolf starves, but the pack survives. Mutual assurance by mutual cooperation is the primary survival mechanism of us social primates. Its what we do, or, at least, its what we did.

What is more “basic human nature” than that? An ethos of individualistic competition exists within the tribe, certainly, as it is competition for regard and respect. The one who produces more benefit for the tribe is highly regarded, not the one who games to control more than his share. (I say “his” advisedly, as such competition is usually symptomatic of testosterone poisoning, which is largely us in the hairy/stinky gender…)

“Basic human nature” is more Communist than any worker’s Soviet could ever hope to be!

[Ravenman]

@Bricker

gal defense funds for profiled African-American defendants, and for funding civil suits by injured persons, or by the families of those deceased. Appearances on talk shows. Producing a documentary. Endowing a non-profit to coordinate awareness on a permanent basis. Lobbying state legislatures to revise laws to reduce police immunity in the aftermath of injury or death to profiled individuals.

Oh, sure, people should start a nonprofit to organize the community to make positive change on social and economic issues. That’s the RIGHT way to make change.

Let’s call it ACORN.