3 ms·

>Yet we can recognize over-representation in violent crimes by any race is probably due to lack of resources It's just racism, being rich doesn't insulate you:

>Yet we can recognize over-representation in violent crimes by any race is probably due to lack of resources It's just racism, being rich doesn't insulate you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Louis_Gates_arrest_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Louis_Gates_arrest_contr... Every major police force has a systemic racism problem and everything else is just window dressing. It's like the Civil War. In middle school you learn it's about slavery. In high school you learn it was about states rights and the balance between federal power and state power. In college you learn it's about slavery. There are always small factors worthy of study but sometimes the core reason really is that simple. >We'd make a bigger dent in UoF incidents and crime in 5 years by just making pre-K childcare free and widely accessible Good luck getting any Republican to vote for this. Republicans only care about people who are old enough to vote.

vorpalhex 6y ago
> Gates found the front door to his home jammed shut and, with the help of his driver, tried to force it open. A local witness reported their activity to the police as a potential burglary in progress. Yeah, usually when you see people forcing a door open, you should let the police know. > It's just racism It's just the results of spiritual decline. Obviously anyone who has deeply found religion would know that spiritual decline is the cause of human suffering, and that you only need a belief in <deity> to reverse these problems. If only we still taught the bible/koran/whatever in schools! Single cause claims for complex phenomenon are almost always nonsense, especially ones without actionable solutions that fail scrutiny. They make great headlines, but they don't really hold up. They're used to attack the outgroup, not fix the problem. > In college you learn it's about slavery. If that's all you learned in college about the civil war, you should ask for a refund. Slavery was absolutely one of reasons several southern states entered the war, but it was by far not the only. Most southerners would not have fought purely for slavery because most of the soldiers were too poor to have owned slaves. > Good luck getting any Republican... Ah yes, we all know <purple team> is to blame! If only it wasn't for purple team, us green team would have solved every woe and problem. After all, every place where green team is in control is a bastion of prosperity, equality and liberty - and everyplace where that isn't true is due to purple team somehow, for some reason! Culture wars are useful for pushing narratives and keeping both sides locked in a relative stalemate. Coke and Pepsi both benefit from these antics (Are you a coke drinker or a pepsi drinker?), but it's not an appropriate framework for political decision making where you often need to find compromise and pressure points to move the conversation forward.
- minikites 6y ago
  >Slavery was absolutely one of reasons several southern states entered the war, but it was by far not the only. Most southerners would not have fought purely for slavery because most of the soldiers were too poor to have owned slaves. It was still about slavery: https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/why-non-slaveholding-southerners-fought https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/why-non-slavehol... >What concerned Southerners most about Lincoln’s election was his opposition to the expansion of slavery into the territories; Southern politicians were clear about that. If new states could not be slave states, went the argument, then it was only a matter of time before the South’s clout in Congress would fade, abolitionists would be ascendant, and the South’s “peculiar institution” – the right to own human beings as property – would be in peril. As I said before, while there are other factors and while they are interesting and worthy of study, sometimes the core reason really is that simple. It's not "enlightened" to pretend that simple things are complex. >Culture wars are useful for pushing narratives and keeping both sides locked in a relative stalemate. Coke and Pepsi both benefit from these antics (Are you a coke drinker or a pepsi drinker?), but it's not an appropriate framework for political decision making where you often need to find compromise and pressure points to move the conversation forward. It's worked great for the Republicans for the last 40 years (Ronald was the original Donald) and there is no sign it will stop working any time soon. It's only ever the left who have to compromise. Name a time in the last 40 years where a Republican has compromised and been rewarded for it.

vorpalhex 6y ago

> Gates found the front door to his home jammed shut and, with the help of his driver, tried to force it open. A local witness reported their activity to the police as a potential burglary in progress. Yeah, usually when you see people forcing a door open, you should let the police know. > It's just racism It's just the results of spiritual decline. Obviously anyone who has deeply found religion would know that spiritual decline is the cause of human suffering, and that you only need a belief in <deity> to reverse these problems. If only we still taught the bible/koran/whatever in schools! Single cause claims for complex phenomenon are almost always nonsense, especially ones without actionable solutions that fail scrutiny. They make great headlines, but they don't really hold up. They're used to attack the outgroup, not fix the problem. > In college you learn it's about slavery. If that's all you learned in college about the civil war, you should ask for a refund. Slavery was absolutely one of reasons several southern states entered the war, but it was by far not the only. Most southerners would not have fought purely for slavery because most of the soldiers were too poor to have owned slaves. > Good luck getting any Republican... Ah yes, we all know <purple team> is to blame! If only it wasn't for purple team, us green team would have solved every woe and problem. After all, every place where green team is in control is a bastion of prosperity, equality and liberty - and everyplace where that isn't true is due to purple team somehow, for some reason! Culture wars are useful for pushing narratives and keeping both sides locked in a relative stalemate. Coke and Pepsi both benefit from these antics (Are you a coke drinker or a pepsi drinker?), but it's not an appropriate framework for political decision making where you often need to find compromise and pressure points to move the conversation forward.

minikites 6y ago
>Slavery was absolutely one of reasons several southern states entered the war, but it was by far not the only. Most southerners would not have fought purely for slavery because most of the soldiers were too poor to have owned slaves. It was still about slavery: https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/why-non-slaveholding-southerners-fought https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/why-non-slavehol... >What concerned Southerners most about Lincoln’s election was his opposition to the expansion of slavery into the territories; Southern politicians were clear about that. If new states could not be slave states, went the argument, then it was only a matter of time before the South’s clout in Congress would fade, abolitionists would be ascendant, and the South’s “peculiar institution” – the right to own human beings as property – would be in peril. As I said before, while there are other factors and while they are interesting and worthy of study, sometimes the core reason really is that simple. It's not "enlightened" to pretend that simple things are complex. >Culture wars are useful for pushing narratives and keeping both sides locked in a relative stalemate. Coke and Pepsi both benefit from these antics (Are you a coke drinker or a pepsi drinker?), but it's not an appropriate framework for political decision making where you often need to find compromise and pressure points to move the conversation forward. It's worked great for the Republicans for the last 40 years (Ronald was the original Donald) and there is no sign it will stop working any time soon. It's only ever the left who have to compromise. Name a time in the last 40 years where a Republican has compromised and been rewarded for it.