3 ms·
Facts taken out of context can obviously be racist. > Aboriginal people just commit more crime More crime than who? More crime than "Normal" people? Or, Mor
by doctor_eval 6y ago
Facts taken out of context can obviously be racist.
> Aboriginal people just commit more crime
More crime than who?
More crime than "Normal" people?
Or, More crime than all other groups with the same economic opportunieis?
More crime than groups with the same health issues? More crime than other people who go blind from trachoma and trichiasis despite it no longer being a public health problem in any other developed country in the world? [0]
More crime than other people who have had their children systematically stolen?
More crime than other people who have been racially abused in public, while playing a game of football?
I mean, come on, you're a smart cookie. You can't accept a claim that "aboriginal people commit more crime" unless you compare it to some equivalent group. Aboriginal and non-aboriginal people are not remotely equivalent, because aboriginal people have been systematically denied the freedom, health outcomes and economic opportunities available to almost any other group in Australia.
[0] https://healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au/learn/health-topics/eye-health/#aihref3 https://healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au/learn/health-topics/eye-hea...
- Udik 6y ago> Facts taken out of context can obviously be racist. A fact is a statement about reality. It can induce racism, but cannot be racist in itself. Facts are scientific, and science is not political. > More crime than who? Of non-Aboriginal people. > Or, More crime than all other groups with the same economic opportunities? Maybe or maybe not. That is beside the point. If you compare incarceration rates of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people you have already decided that that is the division of the population you want to reason about. You cannot argue that the reason group A has higher incarceration rates of group B is because of racism, and when someone else proposes crime rates as an explanation, suddenly you switch to different population subdivisions: by economic opportunities, by health issues, etc. The question about incarceration is: are Aboriginals more likely to be incarcerated for the same crimes than non-Aboriginals?
- underwater 6y agoStatistics can absolutely be both racist and inaccurate, because you can choose which numbers to highlight, or how to slice and dice your data. Simpson's Paradox is a perfect example of how you can bucket data to show a trend that is the opposite of reality.
- Udik 6y agoA statistic is a calculation. Are you saying that the result of a calculation can be racist? It can be produced with a racist intent, or it can be interpreted as such. You can talk of the result of the calculation in a racist way, or derive racist conclusions from it. But per se, it cannot be racist. And you cannot decide to ignore the result of a calculation because you don't agree with the discussion or the questions it generates. EDIT (rate limited): as for your other answer "By saying "Aboriginal people just commit more crime" you are declaring that race is a relevant factor..." you are confusing correlation with causation. Or you are assuming that I might be confusing them.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- doctor_eval 6y agoSo, are you saying that the expression "Aboriginal people just commit more crimes than non-Aboriginal people" is not racist? Really?
- Udik 6y agoIt's a statement about reality. It can be true or false. Racist/ not-racist is not a category of reality, it's an attribute of human intentions and actions.
- waheoo 6y agoDid you read my comment? I literally laid out the real causes straight away after making that remark, race wasn't one of them.