4 ms·

Would you agree or disagree with the statement that "systemic racism against Black Americans exists and is a major problem in American society"?

2-tpg 6y ago
Would you agree or disagree with the statement that "accusing cops of intentional cold-blooded racist-motivated murder on the basis of his and his victim's skin color, without presumption of innocence, sourced from emotion, and with mob justice, is a major problem in American society"? See how you can disagree or agree with my question, while your goal-post moving question can only be agreed to if you are a reasonable person? Just because racist-motivated murderers exist and are problematic, does not mean Floyd was murdered with racist motives. You demand I defend the cop's actions, just for my interpretation of the case does not align with your interpretation. You call me a racist and a liar. You can't even direct quote me, so you put words in my mouth, and then call me disingenuous (I never said "died from an OD"). You are debating from very bad faith, and debating poorly at that. And I don't think you even realize that, nor the damage it does to the debate, working together to a solution, division, and growth of the "silent majority", who is starting to get fed up with this childish I-never-fell-off-a-skateboard Twitter-follower activism.
- i-write-comment 6y ago
  > You are debating from very bad faith, and debating poorly at that You're clearly not trying to "debate" out of a neutral position. You are tossing out a mix of unrelated facts and lies in an attempt to prove that George Floyd's murder was not racially motivated, or that he was actually dying from a fentanyl OD so the cop's behavior would have been fine for a healthy person, or not even to prove anything but to paint him as a career criminal who deserved what he got to bias people against him. Short of a written declaration from Derek Chauvin, stating that "I killed George Floyd because he was black and I was having a bad day", there is nothing that will make you admit this murder was racially motivated, and I think it's pretty obvious to most readers of this thread why that is.
  - CryptoPunk 6y ago
    >>You're clearly not trying to "debate" out of a neutral position. I recommend you practice some introspection, because this statement is so out-of-touch with your own obvious bias and ideological perspective, that it makes discussion with you almost pointless. >>in an attempt to prove that George Floyd's murder was not racially motivated There is absolutely no proof Floyd's murder was racially motivated.
CryptoPunk 6y ago
I absolutely would not agree. There is substantial systemic racism in favor of black Americans.
- jahaja 6y ago
  I'm pretty sure that you are just a troll, but how do you substantiate this outrageous claim?
  - CryptoPunk 6y ago
    Please don't flame me. I could just easily flame you and I'm not. I substantiate this very easily: affirmative action means preferential treatment for job applicants who are black, and affirmative action is very common.
    - jahaja 6y ago
      > Please don't flame me. I could just easily flame you and I'm not. Your first claim so blatantly false and wrong that it's pretty appropriate to assume that you're trolling. I mean, systemic/institutional racism doesn't exist and/or isn't a problem in the US, what? > I substantiate this very easily: affirmative action means preferential treatment for job applicants who are black, and affirmative action is very common. So on the one hand you deny that it exists towards black Americans, but you find affirmative action to be so significant that it however substantiate systemic racism in favour of black Americans? Am I correct you assume that you've honed in on the word systemic and will only accept that it solely means whatever is explicitly written down? So that systemic/institutional racism does not include implicit bias?
      - CryptoPunk 6y ago
        >>Your first claim so blatantly false and wrong that it's pretty appropriate to assume that you're trolling. You do realize that I think exactly the same about you, right? To assume that your perspective is so superior, that it gives you a right to ignore civil protocol, is incredibly arrogant. >>I mean, systemic/institutional racism doesn't exist and/or isn't a problem in the US, what? You're not providing a counter-argument. Your incredulity at my statement of fact doesn't give your absurd allegation of systemic racism any more credibility. >you find affirmative action to be so significant that it however substantiate systemic racism in favour of black Americans? Affirmative action is a form of systemic racism, in that it's racism that institutionized, meaning part of the formal structure of organizations, and accepted by the social contract. >So that systemic/institutional racism does not include implicit bias? The formal structure of institutions, as defined by their formal usually written rules, is the best description of their systemic/institutional properties. Only laws and other formal structures can have a systemic effect, and anything institutional by definition consists solely of them. One can stretch the definition of systemic/institutional a bit to also include the social contract. In neither case can one claim there is anything except systemic/institutional racism in favor of black Americans. Implicit bias is not a systemic property, as it varies between individuals. There is also significant implicit bias in favor of black Americans. This study shows police are 25 times more likely to shoot an unarmed white male than an unarmed black male: https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=267470 https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=2674...

2-tpg 6y ago

Would you agree or disagree with the statement that "accusing cops of intentional cold-blooded racist-motivated murder on the basis of his and his victim's skin color, without presumption of innocence, sourced from emotion, and with mob justice, is a major problem in American society"? See how you can disagree or agree with my question, while your goal-post moving question can only be agreed to if you are a reasonable person? Just because racist-motivated murderers exist and are problematic, does not mean Floyd was murdered with racist motives. You demand I defend the cop's actions, just for my interpretation of the case does not align with your interpretation. You call me a racist and a liar. You can't even direct quote me, so you put words in my mouth, and then call me disingenuous (I never said "died from an OD"). You are debating from very bad faith, and debating poorly at that. And I don't think you even realize that, nor the damage it does to the debate, working together to a solution, division, and growth of the "silent majority", who is starting to get fed up with this childish I-never-fell-off-a-skateboard Twitter-follower activism.

i-write-comment 6y ago
> You are debating from very bad faith, and debating poorly at that You're clearly not trying to "debate" out of a neutral position. You are tossing out a mix of unrelated facts and lies in an attempt to prove that George Floyd's murder was not racially motivated, or that he was actually dying from a fentanyl OD so the cop's behavior would have been fine for a healthy person, or not even to prove anything but to paint him as a career criminal who deserved what he got to bias people against him. Short of a written declaration from Derek Chauvin, stating that "I killed George Floyd because he was black and I was having a bad day", there is nothing that will make you admit this murder was racially motivated, and I think it's pretty obvious to most readers of this thread why that is.
- CryptoPunk 6y ago
  >>You're clearly not trying to "debate" out of a neutral position. I recommend you practice some introspection, because this statement is so out-of-touch with your own obvious bias and ideological perspective, that it makes discussion with you almost pointless. >>in an attempt to prove that George Floyd's murder was not racially motivated There is absolutely no proof Floyd's murder was racially motivated.

CryptoPunk 6y ago

I absolutely would not agree. There is substantial systemic racism in favor of black Americans.

jahaja 6y ago
I'm pretty sure that you are just a troll, but how do you substantiate this outrageous claim?
- CryptoPunk 6y ago
  Please don't flame me. I could just easily flame you and I'm not. I substantiate this very easily: affirmative action means preferential treatment for job applicants who are black, and affirmative action is very common.
  - jahaja 6y ago
    > Please don't flame me. I could just easily flame you and I'm not. Your first claim so blatantly false and wrong that it's pretty appropriate to assume that you're trolling. I mean, systemic/institutional racism doesn't exist and/or isn't a problem in the US, what? > I substantiate this very easily: affirmative action means preferential treatment for job applicants who are black, and affirmative action is very common. So on the one hand you deny that it exists towards black Americans, but you find affirmative action to be so significant that it however substantiate systemic racism in favour of black Americans? Am I correct you assume that you've honed in on the word systemic and will only accept that it solely means whatever is explicitly written down? So that systemic/institutional racism does not include implicit bias?
    - CryptoPunk 6y ago
      >>Your first claim so blatantly false and wrong that it's pretty appropriate to assume that you're trolling. You do realize that I think exactly the same about you, right? To assume that your perspective is so superior, that it gives you a right to ignore civil protocol, is incredibly arrogant. >>I mean, systemic/institutional racism doesn't exist and/or isn't a problem in the US, what? You're not providing a counter-argument. Your incredulity at my statement of fact doesn't give your absurd allegation of systemic racism any more credibility. >you find affirmative action to be so significant that it however substantiate systemic racism in favour of black Americans? Affirmative action is a form of systemic racism, in that it's racism that institutionized, meaning part of the formal structure of organizations, and accepted by the social contract. >So that systemic/institutional racism does not include implicit bias? The formal structure of institutions, as defined by their formal usually written rules, is the best description of their systemic/institutional properties. Only laws and other formal structures can have a systemic effect, and anything institutional by definition consists solely of them. One can stretch the definition of systemic/institutional a bit to also include the social contract. In neither case can one claim there is anything except systemic/institutional racism in favor of black Americans. Implicit bias is not a systemic property, as it varies between individuals. There is also significant implicit bias in favor of black Americans. This study shows police are 25 times more likely to shoot an unarmed white male than an unarmed black male: https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=267470 https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=2674...