5 ms·

> Are there actual, current examples of systemic racism where an entirely non-racist staff would still produce racially-based biased outcomes? If you removed a

> 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...

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...