6 ms·

This struck me as well. Systemic racism means (to me) that if you took the people out of the system, you'd still get biased outcomes based on race. In my view,

This struck me as well. Systemic racism means (to me) that if you took the people out of the system, you'd still get biased outcomes based on race. In my view, it's a different matter to say that a system produces biased results because it is designed to do so, rather than it is systemic because the people operating it make biased choices where their discretion is called on. Are there actual, current examples of systemic racism where an entirely non-racist staff would still produce racially-based biased outcomes?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ikeyany 6y ago
There are plenty, such as the influence of religion and customs instilled by people in the past. Many people are assigned these cultural norms from childhood. For example, the normalized Western image of something like a caucasian Jesus or a caucasian Santa Clause influences ways of thinking and who we see as our cultural betters.
lifeformed 6y ago
> Are there actual, current examples of systemic racism where an entirely non-racist staff would still produce racially-based biased outcomes? If you removed all racists from the economy, black people as a demographic would still be at a huge disadvantage for a very long time (or forever?). The playing field might not level on it's own. If a system starts out with biased functions and runs long enough so that the distribution of the state is biased, removing the biased functions doesn't necessarily guarantee the state will return back to an unbiased equilibrium. Removing explicitly racist laws doesn't remove the biases embedded in the system from two hundred years of slavery and terrorism. There is a complex feedback loop of education, economics, and cultural attitudes that have locked the imbalances in.
- ihsw 6y ago
  Some kids go to school to raise hell, are you saying we should tolerate it because their skin color indicates some kind of victim status? Doesn't that put the other non-disruptive students (whom share the same skin color) at a disadvantage?
- MuffinFlavored 6y ago
  the term “systemic racism”, to me, sounds like parts of the system are actively racist. your argument is true (black people are economically disadvantaged given history), but aren’t poor white people/latino people too? how is a poor black person any worse off than a poor white person?
- tomp 6y ago
  Your idea of "justice" is based upon group membership, as unfortunately for many other people. I see absolutely no difference between a poor white person vs. a poor black person. Sure, there might be more poor black people, but so what? Do you seriously believe that rich white people would actively be trying to help poor white people and not poor black people? No, everybody wants riches for themselves, poor whites aren't given anything either. This is what I tune out of the conversation whenever someone mentions "patriarchy" (the "modern" version, i.e. "men are in power" not "men own women") - I'm a man, but I've never received any benefit just because (most of) our presidents / businessmen are men (in fact, arguably (individual) women receive more benefits, because most of those men are heterosexuals).
  - sosborn 6y ago
    > I've never received any benefit You have, it is just that these benefits are so ingrained in society that you didn't notice. That's what people mean when they talk about systemic issues.
  - cdirkx 6y ago
    I am a man and worked in fastfood during my studies. I was offered a permanent contract immediatly after my first month, while there were also a lot of women with kids working there who had been on temp contracts for years. Probably because I could work at night; the mothers worked during schooltimes. Any time someone got pregnant, their contract was not renewed. In this situation I had an advantage because of my gender. This was not because the business itself was specifically sexist, in fact almost all of management were women. Instead, the systems in place made it so that financially smart decisions negatively impacted women.
    - tomp 6y ago
      > Probably because I could work at night; the mothers worked during schooltimes. I mean, sounds it literally wasn’t sexism, you were just a better worker. Obviously, it’s a problem that society doesn’t value people having children. But that’s an orthogonal issue to sexism, I’m pretty sure that if a father couldn’t work nights, he’d be treated exactly the same. Ideally the society would subsidize people having kids, or businesses employing workers with kids, or something...
whakim 6y ago
In many cases, I don't think you can separate "people" from "the system" because the system is a human construct in which human discretion is called upon repeatedly. For example, studies which show that young white children react more negatively to black faces compared to white faces - is this "the system"? Is is it "discretion"? I'm not sure you can differentiate the two. It's also important to note that just because you fixed a racist practice, that doesn't immediately endow an underprivileged group with the full fruits of equality. For example, redlining may now be illegal in the United States, but middle class white Americans have been benefiting from nearly a hundred years' worth of wealth accumulation through housing that black Americans were locked out of. This is a good example of how the "system" produces racially-biased outcomes without any racist human input in the present day.
- mov_ 6y ago
  It seems like you're saying momentum is racist.
  - whakim 6y ago
    I'm not sure I understand what you're saying, but if your implication is that I'm saying "(legal) progress towards racial equality is racist", then I'm not really sure how you got that from my comment. My point is simply that you can have greater legal equality and yet things that happened in the past can still cause racist outcomes in the present (see my example).
    - mov_ 6y ago
      > For example, redlining may now be illegal in the United States, but middle class white Americans have been benefiting from nearly a hundred years' worth of wealth accumulation through housing that black Americans were locked out of. This is a good example of how the "system" produces racially-biased outcomes without any racist human input in the present day. I think this is describing how the system includes momentum, and you're saying that the system (momentum) is producing racially-biased outcomes _without_ racist input today. That's true in the strictest, most technical sense, but is this supposed to be a motivation for reparations or something?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ikeyany 6y ago

There are plenty, such as the influence of religion and customs instilled by people in the past. Many people are assigned these cultural norms from childhood. For example, the normalized Western image of something like a caucasian Jesus or a caucasian Santa Clause influences ways of thinking and who we see as our cultural betters.

lifeformed 6y ago

> Are there actual, current examples of systemic racism where an entirely non-racist staff would still produce racially-based biased outcomes? If you removed all racists from the economy, black people as a demographic would still be at a huge disadvantage for a very long time (or forever?). The playing field might not level on it's own. If a system starts out with biased functions and runs long enough so that the distribution of the state is biased, removing the biased functions doesn't necessarily guarantee the state will return back to an unbiased equilibrium. Removing explicitly racist laws doesn't remove the biases embedded in the system from two hundred years of slavery and terrorism. There is a complex feedback loop of education, economics, and cultural attitudes that have locked the imbalances in.

ihsw 6y ago
Some kids go to school to raise hell, are you saying we should tolerate it because their skin color indicates some kind of victim status? Doesn't that put the other non-disruptive students (whom share the same skin color) at a disadvantage?
MuffinFlavored 6y ago
the term “systemic racism”, to me, sounds like parts of the system are actively racist. your argument is true (black people are economically disadvantaged given history), but aren’t poor white people/latino people too? how is a poor black person any worse off than a poor white person?
tomp 6y ago
Your idea of "justice" is based upon group membership, as unfortunately for many other people. I see absolutely no difference between a poor white person vs. a poor black person. Sure, there might be more poor black people, but so what? Do you seriously believe that rich white people would actively be trying to help poor white people and not poor black people? No, everybody wants riches for themselves, poor whites aren't given anything either. This is what I tune out of the conversation whenever someone mentions "patriarchy" (the "modern" version, i.e. "men are in power" not "men own women") - I'm a man, but I've never received any benefit just because (most of) our presidents / businessmen are men (in fact, arguably (individual) women receive more benefits, because most of those men are heterosexuals).
- sosborn 6y ago
  > I've never received any benefit You have, it is just that these benefits are so ingrained in society that you didn't notice. That's what people mean when they talk about systemic issues.
- cdirkx 6y ago
  I am a man and worked in fastfood during my studies. I was offered a permanent contract immediatly after my first month, while there were also a lot of women with kids working there who had been on temp contracts for years. Probably because I could work at night; the mothers worked during schooltimes. Any time someone got pregnant, their contract was not renewed. In this situation I had an advantage because of my gender. This was not because the business itself was specifically sexist, in fact almost all of management were women. Instead, the systems in place made it so that financially smart decisions negatively impacted women.
  - tomp 6y ago
    > Probably because I could work at night; the mothers worked during schooltimes. I mean, sounds it literally wasn’t sexism, you were just a better worker. Obviously, it’s a problem that society doesn’t value people having children. But that’s an orthogonal issue to sexism, I’m pretty sure that if a father couldn’t work nights, he’d be treated exactly the same. Ideally the society would subsidize people having kids, or businesses employing workers with kids, or something...

whakim 6y ago

In many cases, I don't think you can separate "people" from "the system" because the system is a human construct in which human discretion is called upon repeatedly. For example, studies which show that young white children react more negatively to black faces compared to white faces - is this "the system"? Is is it "discretion"? I'm not sure you can differentiate the two. It's also important to note that just because you fixed a racist practice, that doesn't immediately endow an underprivileged group with the full fruits of equality. For example, redlining may now be illegal in the United States, but middle class white Americans have been benefiting from nearly a hundred years' worth of wealth accumulation through housing that black Americans were locked out of. This is a good example of how the "system" produces racially-biased outcomes without any racist human input in the present day.

mov_ 6y ago
It seems like you're saying momentum is racist.
- whakim 6y ago
  I'm not sure I understand what you're saying, but if your implication is that I'm saying "(legal) progress towards racial equality is racist", then I'm not really sure how you got that from my comment. My point is simply that you can have greater legal equality and yet things that happened in the past can still cause racist outcomes in the present (see my example).
  - mov_ 6y ago
    > For example, redlining may now be illegal in the United States, but middle class white Americans have been benefiting from nearly a hundred years' worth of wealth accumulation through housing that black Americans were locked out of. This is a good example of how the "system" produces racially-biased outcomes without any racist human input in the present day. I think this is describing how the system includes momentum, and you're saying that the system (momentum) is producing racially-biased outcomes _without_ racist input today. That's true in the strictest, most technical sense, but is this supposed to be a motivation for reparations or something?