That’s a very poor argument – the vast majority of black people are law abiding and not violent. A stereotype can’t be based on facts if the facts are that most of the people in question don’t fit the stereotype.
No, I didn’t. I do think (well, not “think”, it’s a fact) that it is true that blacks commit the majority of homicides and robberies in the US, and disproportionately more other crimes (except, I believe, DUIs). There may be widespread belief that blacks are more likely to commit crimes - but it is not a “caricature”. And it’s not wrong.
We weren’t talking about such beliefs – we were talking about the stereotype of black men as violent, and the like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTdUQ9SYhUw - the “revolving door” ad is at start of that video.
What are you talking about? There are a dozen white criminals and one black one. And their faces are also on screen for half of that ad.
Sure. Show me that such are widely held.
The Willie Horton ad starts at about 1:40 in that link. Here it isin its entirety.
It’s not a different argument at all. Terr said exactly this.
No, we can’t - pausing to note yet another demand for a change of topic. We’ve demonstrated how black people were viewed and the historical context of those views (they were utterly false and were created to justify terrorism and oppression). The argument here is twofold: one, stereotypes do not always have a firm basis in reality. Two, since the stereotypes of black people 100 years ago were false, the same stereotypes are unlikely to be true today and certainly should be presumed false absent evidence that’s much stronger than the endless cries of “disproportionate! disproportionate!” that we’re seeing in this thread. Common sense ought to tell you that a malicious stereotype from 100 years ago probably didn’t just coincidentally turn out to be true. What’s more likely, and this is fairly well supported by the evidence that’s been posted regarding differing rates of arrest and incarceration, is that what you’re reading is just an updated version of the same stereotype. It’s dressed in modern language, but that shouldn’t fool anybody. People say ‘the rate of murder is disproportionate, look at these crime stats!’ and complain about hip hop instead of talking about phrenology, but it’s the same set of claims for the same purpose.
The Willie Horton ad is an example of politicians attempting to use this belief for political gain (and it worked!). Some others – the “gangsta” stereotype for black youths, the ridiculous focus by Fox News on the virtually non-existent black nationalist groups like the New Black Panthers, the “savage” imagery often used in extreme right wing attacks on Obama (and other prominent black people), for starters.
That’s not the one he was referring to. The one he cited was the “revolving door” ad - as the cite says “…never mentions Horton by name, but the connection was clear and the ad received considerable news coverage.”
The ad you link to does mention Horton by name. Of course they put his picture up - why wouldn’t they. They also put his name up. And the story. Or was there another, white, murderer, released by Dukakis that killed someone immediately after his release that they could have used in the ad and didn’t?
And as I said, the person responsible for the ad acknowledged exactly what he was doing.
For those less familiar, Atwater ran George H.W. Bush’s presidential campaign in 1988.
It sounds like you’re attempting to focus on one ad and dodge the actual discussion. A one-time lapse, I’m sure. There were multiple ads.
The ad was meant to capitalize on these stereotypes. If Horton had been white, the ad wouldn’t have been nearly as effective.
Yes, and I don’t see the problem with the ads. Wasn’t Horton story big in MA at the time? Was there another such egregious story that involved a white murderer that was not used against Dukakis?
I mean, if the ads said something like “Dukakis releases murderers that immediately kill again” and showed some anonymous black actors’ faces with it, I can see how that could be construed as playing on racism. But this was a real story, real murderer, who happened to be black, and it was used, showing his face, and his name. Do you seriously think that if the story was exactly the same but Horton was white, it wouldn’t have been used, politically, against Dukakis?
The ads were good politics. At the time, subtle racism was often good politics. Today, thankfully, subtle racism is not so good politics, for the most part.
It may or may not have been used, but it would have been far less effective.
I don’t see the logic. It would have been far less effective… because whites are much less scared of white murderers?
By the way, what you describe (translated to a different issue and a different stereotype – the “any successful black person is a beneficiary of affirmative action”) – complete with an aggrieved white actor playing someone who just lost their job to a black person – is exactly the type of ad run by Jesse Helms.
Another good political ad with some subtle (or not so subtle) racism taking advantage of a negative stereotype about black people.
Yes (at least for the white people – racist Democrats who are disgruntled with their party – targeted by this ad).
it must be really frustrating to be targeted by the police because you’re black when you know you’re a law abiding citizen … I’m sure it happens and will continue to happen, however …
you also have to look at where the police are working and who they’re interacting with … if you’re constantly having run ins with people who are committing crimes and more often times than not they happen to be black and dressed a certain way then more often times than not you’re going to start being wary of that certain group … just the same as if they’re having constant run ins with darker skin latinos or even whites who are dressed a certain way …
gotta look at both sides of the coin …
also, people don’t like to talk about it because folks nowadays think it doesn’t matter how you dress and you should be able to dress however you want even if you look like a total delinquent but first impressions and overall impressions are important and they will influence how someone treats you or perceives you, whether you like it or not … you can definitely do things to fend off suspicion … I’ve dressed or done things in my younger days that made me look suspicious to the police and in some instances I ended up being stopped … I clearly notice the changes before and after changing my attire, attitude and just overall way of going about things
it’s ridiculous to say that ad would be less effective if the guy was white … I mean come on now … if I hear that some convict was released and he went and kidnapped a couple and repeatedly raped the gf, that is going to get my attention no matter what the hell the guy looks like … that would’ve worked just fine for his ad … no one likes hearing about anyone getting kidnapped and raped, to say the obvious
The ad is against “racial quotas” and you’re objecting to them using white actor losing their job to a black person? It’s racial quotas they are talking about.
Yes white people are less scared of white murderers than black ones? Cite?