Sneering progressives are driving young white men into the arms of the GOP

Politics & Elections
421

I know you don’t believe that they’re scum who can never be rehabilitated – I used that kind of hyperbole to, hopefully, get you to see what I saw your position as leading to. Apologies if I wasn’t clear.

[quote]
The number of decent fathers who are in prison, and the amount of time lost to their children, is insignificant, IMO. This is for a number of reasons -
[ol][li]Most black children are already growing up without their fathers anyway. [/li][li]I suspect, although I have no figures and don’t intend to Google, that the percentage of black children growing up without their fathers is even larger for the children of convicts. So it is even less significant.[/li][li]Which is the more effective approach to the problem of black fathers being lost to their children because they are in prison? Fighting to get them released earlier, or fighting to get them to obey the law so they don’t get sent to prison in the first place? The first gets an extra year. How much does the second gain you?[/ol][/li][/quote]

I think it’s probably very significant to those kids who have longer times without their fathers. Further, I’ve already showed you data that suggests that most black children actually do have paternal involvement – the differing sources of data just depend on definition. I hold that some paternal involvement is better than none, for most kids and most fathers, anyway – isn’t that a reasonable position? And most black kids, like most kids of any type, do have some interaction with their fathers (even if many or most don’t live with them), but that will necessarily be reduced if their fathers are in prison. Notably, your point #1 is reinforced and made worse by these disparities in sentencing. That seems like an awfully good reason to fight these disparities, right? Especially if we don’t have the exact numerical value on its significance?

As far as I can tell, you’re agreeing with me on this assertion – racist/biased policies in the justice system lead to less time that black kids have with their fathers, on average. You just think the difference is insignificant. I’m pleased that you don’t fight the assertion, only the significance – this is the first time I can recall you agreeing that there is, in fact, measurable racism/bias in an American institution in the present, and not just the past.

If I dug and dug and found that, say, the average black kid spent X months/years less with their father than they would otherwise due to the sentencing disparities that come from racism and bias in the justice system, what value of X would you hold to be significant?

As for “which is better” between fighting racism in the justice system and trying to prevent crime, I see no reason why we have to choose. Racism and bias in the justice system should be fought, period. Right? Also, crime and other poor decisions should be dissuaded, by things like encouraging fathers to spend time with their children, and eliminating policies that work against this. And lots of other stuff too.

But thank you for a largely snark-free post, and it’s always a pleasure to reasonably and rationally discuss things with you.

422

Well, I’ll do my best, but when you load a phrase with explicit racial overtones it’s a little difficult.

423

Illegals is too dehumanizing, and undocumented papers over the fact that they aren’t authorized to be here. Would you call someone driving without a license an Undocumented Driver?

My preferred term is “Unauthorized Immigrants.”

424

Not so fast - I was granting the idea for the purpose of discussion.

This is the cite provided earlier, and it says -

So no, it’s not the slam dunk you apparently believe.

Regards,
Shodan

425

Who said anything about judges? My criticism is of the entire justice system. That doesn’t require biased or racist judges (though, of course, that could be involved). It also involves decisions made by prosecutors, cops, and legislators, among others.

That link concludes:

What about the questions I posed? Pretty please?

426

Can someone tell me how “white privilege” isn’t completely dependent on the existence of non-whites being treated poorly?

I can’t think of any other scenario, where Officer Joe being professional to the person he pulled over is anything other than just doing his damn job.

But, if we include a scenario of a black person, somewhere, getting searched for no reason, all the sudden Officer Joe being professional isn’t just doing his job? He’s doing something special? The motorist is getting something special? Not getting your car searched for no reason is now a privilege I should find remarkable? Excuse me if I call bullshit!

The absence of discrimination is NOT privilege. It’s impartiality. They are NOT synonymous.

427

Just because a certain set of situations do not exist for one group of people doesn’t by default make them exist for another. It can be perceived that way, but it does not necessarily make it true. This is why many people feel it is blaming one group for the shortcomings (either internally or externally influenced) of another.

On top of that, it is a dog-whistle and rallying cry for those unwilling to accept that maybe the problem does exist in the communities perceived as being absent of this “privilege” and attempt to point the finger at others. What if this privilege that whites mysteriously enjoy is actually the default for all people, and when the exceptions happen they only become prominent because of media pot-stirring? There is more crime in many black communities, maybe police target blacks more often because of this and that is the problem itself, not the idea that some universal privilege or immunity is afforded by being white.

That being said, I understand what you are saying and getting at, what you are saying is not hard to understand it just has some logical discrepancies when digging deeper into the subject. I am assuming (forgive me) that is why many do not like the whole concept of “white privilege”. It just doesn’t make sense. Two sides to a coin and all of that.

428

+1

Well said.

429

This is just a semantics tantrum. Yes, lots of people are using the word “privilege” in a way that you don’t think fits the meaning of the word. But meanings depend on usage – if lots of people are using “privilege” in this manner, then that’s part of the definition. That’s how language works. Complaining about it won’t change it.

430

No. Being aware that people who don’t look like you do get their cars searched for no reason, and you don’t, just because of how you look, is awareness that you do indeed have privilege. If that shit didn’t happen, then there’d be impartiality, but it does happen.

The *presence *of discrimination against others that you don’t experience is privilege.

431

As a white person (and a male one to boot) I don’t worry about bad cops, biased potential employers, rude starbucks employees, or a host of other things. I may encounter any of those people, but the odds are long and I have the *privilege *of not having to worry about it. It’s not an attack on me to point that out, nor would I take any offense at it.

In any event, I wouldn’t get too hung up on the word if you’re cool with the concept.

432

“Waaa!!! But it doesn’t meet MY definition of the word!”

Humpty Dumpty would like a word with you, Ashtura.

433

Like I said, I hear you. It’s kind of an antagonistic title but it seems you basically agree that the concept is valid if it just had another name. I think most people agree that when we talk of equality, we want the justice system to treat all people like it treats white people currently, not start pulling people over for “driving while white”.

434

Judges set sentences.

Those who wrote the Sentencing Commission report said exactly the opposite.

OK.

The odds are that there are rather few of those kinds of kids - most of them don’t have time with their fathers anyway.

Your Wiki cite actually undermines your position - if most black kids have a father figure anyway, then why can’t a father in prison be as easily replaced as if he just abandoned his family?

But that having been said, there is a significant difference between not having your father in the home, and having your mother’s latest boyfriend in the home. This is for Canada, but I don’t think it is particularly different in the US.

No to both questions. Not knowing if a problem is significant is not a good reason to fight the problem.

Regards,
Shodan

435

Oh no, not a sneering progressive! I’m just gonna have to vote R straight down ticket for the rest of my life! :D:D:D:D

436

Prosecutors recommend sentences, and the actions of all those along the line, from cops to prosecutors, can have influence on sentencing. Right?

They said it provides less proof? Do you have a cite for this (and how would that work)?

Do you mean any time? Some time? And “few”? These are extremely vague descriptors, which make it easy to dismiss everything. I’m unconvinced by such vague and uncited descriptors.

It’s reasonable to believe that, say, in the 1950s the justice system was skewed against black people, right? What has changed since then to make it unreasonable to believe this, and unreasonable to suspect that it could have influence on sentencing disparities?

But fewer black kids than white kids have father figures, as you’ve noted… so how does this undermine the position? It’s well in keeping with my assertion – that biases in sentencing reduce the amount of time kids have with their fathers (or father figures in general, who could be unjustly in longer sentences, whether or not they’re the biological dad).

This doesn’t refute any of my assertions.

I don’t understand. You don’t believe it’s appropriate to fight disparities in sentencing that come from racism if those disparities lengthen the time black kids go without their fathers? I find it very hard to believe that you really believe this, since I still think you have some compassion in you for these kids.

You also missed a question – the “X” quesiton. If I found out an average time of father-loss to black kids by these sentencing disparities, what “X” value would you consider significant?

437

Can we agree that there’s all kinds of ways to be discriminatory that don’t necessarily fall into the category of “unprofessional behavior?” Some of these might not even be conscious acts of discrimination, as I pointed out earlier in the thread in a post that was soundly ignored:

I understand why it really bothers some people to think of this as “white” privilege, but there really is a social conditioning in a lot of cultures, ours included, that causes people to associate certain character traits with the amount of melanin in your skin.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I experience privileges based on the accident of my birth constantly – I’m a white, 6 foot tall man with good skin, decent clothes and straight teeth thanks to my parents being able to afford orthodontics. I can feel people ease up when I walk into a tense (or potentially tense) situation, because I fit a social pattern of a guy who’s not going to cause trouble. I get my way more often then not, even when I probably shouldn’t. At work, clients love when I walk in because most people are unconsciously racist when dealing with foreigners in IT.

Certainly people react to me this way for lots of reasons, not just the color of my skin, but I have brown co-workers who I can see don’t get the same reaction even though they’re better looking and dress better and have straighter, whiter teeth (at least, until people have gotten to know them).

You can take each of those examples of subtle positive reactions that make my life easier on a day-to-day basis and say that they’re all examples of a lack of discrimination and not privilege, but really, as a descriptive term, “white privilege” is short, accurate, and fair.

438

But if it is a new usage that the majority of English speakers do not subscribe to, it should be labeled “NONSTANDARD” in the dictionary.

BTW, you and Shodan have something in common: when I take issue with something he posts, both of you ignore it. :stuck_out_tongue:

439

Considering the incredible variety of word usage in English, I don’t think that’s standard practice for dictionaries. They list all the definitions, even ones that aren’t incredibly widely used.

So you need more praise or credit? Here you go, have a cookie.

441

Who is telling them this stuff?

Their own side. This is mostly white guys searching the internet for anything they can find that may be read as denigrating white guys and then putting it out for wider distribution on the Honky Nazi Network as “See? This is how the whole world is against us!”.