5 ms·
Yes, the results are a mess. But did the voting public elect "tough on crime" politicians as a covert way to oppress minorities? Or did they elect those politic
by gascan 8y ago
Yes, the results are a mess. But did the voting public elect "tough on crime" politicians as a covert way to oppress minorities? Or did they elect those politicians because they were concerned about crime?
- tonysdg 8y agoOption 3: Did they elect those politicians because they were concerned about the idea of crime? Fear is a powerful motivator; I'd be interested to see how areas that elected "tough on crime" politicians correlate to actual crime rates.
- taurath 8y agoI think you have to look at the effect at the end of the day. Did redlining happen to specifically punish and oppress minorities, or to let white homeowners feel "safe from criminals"? "Lock all the criminals up" when the subtext/unspoken relation for "criminals" is "black people/minorities" is a way to oppress minorities. Its also a failure to think of or implement a different path to work against poverty or criminality - something politicians love to do as a crackdown is easier for them to implement than actually improving people's lives.