October 8, 2020

Was there any discussion of "systemic racism" during the debate?

I need to read the transcript, in part because I want to do a word search, but in part because I, like so many of you, became distracted when a fly landed on Mike Pence's hair and stayed there for quite a long while. I thought it would never leave. Pence has helmet hair, so zero chance of feeling the weight or movement of the fly, and the fly barely moved. We talked about whether the fly was stuck or dead and whether it symbolized racism, being a discordant black dot on highly structured white hair. 

Here's the transcript. I see, searching it, that Kamala Harris never said "racist" or "racism," let alone "systemic" or "systemically." But Mike Pence said "systemically racist," and it is in this portion of the debate, where I was distracted by the fly in Mike Pence's hair. Let's work through this carefully, beginning with the question framed by the moderator, Susan Page. I've made some corrections to the transcript, which I'll note with boldface.
In March, Breonna Taylor, a 26 year old emergency room technician in Louisville was shot and killed after police officers executing a search warrant in a narcotics investigation, broke into her apartment. The police said they identified themselves. Taylor’s boyfriend said he didn’t hear them do that. He used a gun registered to him to fire a shot, which wounded an officer. The officers then fired more than 20 rounds into the apartment. They say they were acting in self-defense. None of them have been indicted in connection with her death. Senator Harris, in the case of Breonna Taylor was justice done?...

Notice that Page did not mention race at all. Taylor was identified by her age, her occupation, and her city. The question relating to indictment should be right in the zone where former prosecutor Kamala Harris can display the most expertise. Will she show respect for the process? Will she accuse the grand jury of racism and perhaps explain that white people carry racism into their decision-making whether they realize it or not? That is, will she demonstrate a belief in systemic racism or "implicit bias" and invite us to understand and share the belief in an enlightened new way (which is, I think, what the Black Lives Matter movement would like us to do)?

Harris answers:

I don’t believe so. 

That is, she doesn't believe that justice was done. But then she does not explain why. She backs into personal details:

And I’ve talked with Breonna’s mother, Tamika Palmer and her family and her family deserves justice. She was a beautiful young woman. 

Breonna Taylor's beauty is utterly irrelevant to the question whether justice was done. 

She had as her life goal to become a nurse and she wanted to become an EMT to first learn what’s going on out on the street so she could then become a nurse and save lives. 

That's poignant, but irrelevant to the question whether justice was done. The question is what the police did, and that's the same whether or not Taylor had admirable career plans. 

And her life was taken unjustifiably and tragically and violently. And it brings me to the eight minutes and 46 seconds that America witnessed during which an American man was tortured and killed under the knee of an armed uniformed police officer. 

Now, she's shifting to the story of George Floyd, presumably because the police behavior is more clearly wrong, but in that case the police officer has been charged with murder, so it's not relevant to the question asked. The next part wanders even farther from the question:

And people around our country of every race, of every age, of every gender, perfect strangers to each other, marched shoulder to shoulder, arm in arm, fighting for us to finally achieve that ideal of equal justice under law. And I was a part of those peaceful protests. 

Yes, and the police were charged. Also, the protests were not entirely peaceful, but, yes, it would be nice if we could all come together and join hands over the simple principle of equal justice under law.

And I believe strongly that first of all, we are never going to condone violence, but we always must fight for the values that we hold dear, including the fight to achieve our ideals. 

Now, she's reduced the complicated problem to the simplest possible terms. We must fight, but never with violence. And we have "values" and "ideals."

And that’s why Joe Biden and I have said on this subject, look, and I’m a former career prosecutor. 

She mentioned Joe, and then she talked like Joe, stopping in the middle of a sentence and saying "look." But I'm looking and I appreciate the "former career prosecutor" intro. Take us to a more sophisticated level of analysis!

I know what I’m talking about. Bad cops are bad for good cops. We need reform of our policing in America and our criminal justice system, which is why Joe and I will immediately ban choke holds and carotid holds

But the question is about prosecution, and now you've switched the subject to police practices.

George Floyd would be alive today if we did that. We will require a national registry for police officers who break the law. We will, on the issue of criminal justice reform, get rid of private prisons and cash bail and we will decriminalize marijuana. 

She's spouting policy items about police and prisons and avoiding the prosecution question. Her time runs out, and she adds one more item: "And we will expunge the records of those who have been convicted of marijuana." Well, does that mean that you were an agent of injustice when you prosecuted people on marijuana charges? Oh, but time is up, and that wasn't the question anyway. The question was whether justice was done in the Breonna Taylor case. The closest you got to an answer was: "her life was taken unjustifiably." The passive construction avoided taking a position on whether justice required an indictment of the police for murder. 

The moderator asks Pence "the same question," which reminds those of us who are paying attention that we never heard an answer from Harris. The question is: "In the case of Breonna Taylor, was justice done?"

Pence begins with a quick expression of sympathy and then gets right to the question:

Well, our heart breaks for the loss of any innocent American life and the family of Breonna Taylor has our sympathies. But I trust our justice system, a grand jury that reviews the evidence. And it really is remarkable that as a former prosecutor, you would assume that an impaneled grand jury looking at all the evidence, got it wrong. But you’re entitled to your opinion, Senator. 

He doesn't say the grand jury got it right, only that he trusts the process. He characterizes Harris's opinion as stronger than it sounded coming from her — that the grand jury "got it wrong." The implication is that she ought to presume the system got it right. If her point is, they got it wrong — especially if she means it was a miscarriage of justice — she ought to get into the evidence. I observe that it would have been impossible, in the 2 minutes given, for Kamala Harris to explain why the grand jury got it wrong. Maybe she's not just "assuming," but she's considered the evidence in depth. That said, she ran out the 2 minute clock on material that was unresponsive to the question. She didn't even try to display a bit of her prosecutorial expertise.

Pence continues, and, like Harris, he leaves Breonna Taylor behind in search of topics that work better for him:

I think, and with regard to George Floyd, there’s no excuse for what happened to George Floyd. 

Why don't we need to wait for the justice system to play out there too? Isn't he assuming without "looking at all the evidence"? 

Justice will be served, but there’s also no excuse for the rioting and looting that followed. 

Now, he's onto the subject he likes:

I mean, it really is astonishing. Flora Westbrook is with us here tonight in Salt Lake City. Just a few weeks ago, I stood at what used to be her salon, it was burned to the ground by rioters and looters. And Flora is still trying to put her life back together. And I must tell you, this presumption that you hear consistently from Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, that America is systemically racist, and that as Joe Biden said that he believes that law enforcement has an implicit bias against minorities is a great insult to the men and women who serve in law enforcement. 

And there are the words I was searching for: "systemically racist" and "implicit bias." His analysis is simply that it insults the police.

And I want everyone to know who puts on the uniform of law enforcement every day, President Trump and I stand with you. 

His side is the side of supporting the police. As a group we should honor them, and any problems relate to individual police, as you see in this next part. The idea is not to see racism woven throughout everything, but to work on particular bad acts. And here he has a way of blaming Harris:

And it is remarkable that when Senator Tim Scott tried to pass a police reform bill, brought together a group of Republicans and Democrats, Senator Harris, you got up and walked out of the room and then you filibustered Senator Tim Scott’s bill on the Senate floor that would have provided new accountability, new police resources. We don’t have to choose between supporting law enforcement, improving public safety and supporting our African-American neighbors and all of our minorities.... We’ll always stand with law enforcement and we’ll do what we’ve done... From day one, it is improve the lives of African-Americans, record unemployment, record investments in education.... We’ll fight for school choice for all of....

The ellipses are places where the moderator told him his time is up. Harris says "I’d like to respond" and is given time.

I will not sit here and be lectured by the Vice President on what it means to enforce the laws of our country. The only one on this stage, who has personally prosecuted everything from child sexual assault to homicide. I’m the only one on this stage who has prosecuted the big banks for taking advantage of America’s homeowners. I am the only one on this stage who prosecuted for-profit colleges for taking advantage of our veterans.

Okay, then, move on to what I wanted to hear from you when it was your turn. You're the prosecutor. Give us some hard-core prosecutor talk!  

And the reality of this is that we are talking about an election in 27 days where last week the President of the United States took a debate stage in front of 70 million Americans and refused to condemn white supremacists.

Ah! Now, she's stepping up to the topic of racism, but she's coming at it laterally by attacking Trump for that problem that obsessed everyone early last week, his failure to denounce white supremacists strongly enough.  Mike Pence says "Not true," but she continues:

And it wasn’t like he didn’t have a chance. He didn’t do it. And then he doubled down. And then he said, when pressed, "stand back, stand by.” And this is a part of a pattern of Donald Trump’s. 

Here comes the litany that makes Trump haters sure he's a racist and Trump defenders feel that these are all distortions and lies... and absolutely nothing about the soundness of the justice system:

He called Mexicans rapists and criminals. He instituted as his first act, a Muslim ban. He on the issue of Charlottesville, where people were peacefully protesting the need for racial justice, where a young woman was killed. And on the other side, there were neo-Nazis carrying Tiki torches, shouting racial epithets, anti-Semitic slurs. And Donald Trump when asked about it said, “There were fine people on both sides.” This is who we have as the President of the United States and America, you deserve better. Joe Biden will be a president who brings our country together... And recognizes the beauty in our diversity and the fact that we all have so much more in common than what separates us.

The moderator, Susan Page, gives Pence time to respond and he gets right to correcting the remarks about Charlottesville:

Thank you, Susan. I appreciate that very much. I think this is one of the things that makes people dislike the media so much in this country, Susan, is that you selectively edit just like Senator Harris did, comments that President Trump and I and others on our side made. I mean, Senator Harris conveniently omitted after the President made comments about people on either side of the debate over monuments, he condemned the KKK, neo-Nazis and white supremacists and has done so repeatedly. You’re concerned that he doesn’t condemn neo-Nazis. President Trump has Jewish grandchildren. His daughter and son-in-law are Jewish. This is a President who respects and cherishes all of the American people. 

A good answer, if anybody who needed to hear that heard that. The fly was competing for attention.  

But you talk about having personally prosecuted. I’m glad you brought up your record, Senator. 

At that point Page tells him his time's up. He says:

I really need to make this point. When you were DA in San Francisco, when you left office, African-Americans were 19 times more likely to be prosecuted for minor drug offenses than whites and Hispanics. When you were Attorney General of California, you increased the disproportionate incarceration of blacks in California. 

Now, that's good. That issue should have been in one of the questions! He goes on (with Susan Page repeatedly saying his time is up, as my ellipses show):

You did nothing on criminal justice reform in California. You didn’t lift a finger to pass the first step back on Capitol Hill. I mean, the reality is your record speaks for itself.... President Trump and I have fought for criminal justice before... We fought for educational choice and opportunities for African-Americans and all of our members.... And we’ll do it for four more years... 

Kamala Harris wants another response because "he attacked my record." She gets it and says: 

First of all, having served as the Attorney General of the state of California, the work that I did is a model of what our nation needs to do, and we will be able to do under a Joe Biden presidency. Our agenda includes what this administration has failed to do. It will be about not only instituting a ban on choke holds and carotid holds....

Page cuts her off and tells her these are "points that you made earlier in the hour." Harris wasn't defending her record but switching to listing things on the agenda for the future, and it's not even anything about prosecution. It's back to the chokeholds and carotid holds — police behavior. 

I can see why I fixated on that fly. It was real. While the humans wandered all over the place, it stood firm.

120 comments:

gspencer said...

Heels Up charge the Don with racism because he didn't follow a quota system for appointing judges.

wendybar said...

She is a blatant liar. She "claims" they won't stop fracking. There are videos of Joe Biden saying that they will. She had the talking points down great. That's all they have. I am so glad Trump won't do the farce of a virtual debate because you just KNOW, Joe will be fed the questions and the answers. They have nothing. They are the party of the rioting and violence going on right now. WHY won't they denounce it???

gilbar said...

i was So Much more outraged about the Breonna Taylor shooting back when i thought that
the cops burst in without knocking or announcing themselves
the cops shot her while she was laying in her bed
that she wasn't involved in the drug ring

it seems like All these things follow the SAME pattern
1) horrible 'facts' are told to us
2) OUTRAGE
3) arson and looting
4) we find out that those horrible 'facts' are all a bunch of bull; told just to outrage us

mockturtle said...

Tulsi knows how to put Kamala on the ropes about her egregious record as CA Attorney General. She should be called in as an adviser, party be damned.

robother said...

"There's flies in the kitchen I can hear 'em there buzzing
And I ain't done nothing since I woke up today...
To believe in this living is just a hard way to go."

We all need an Angel from Montgomery to take us away from the sheer tedium of 2020.

Michael K said...

Harris lied repeatedly, not just the one about "white supremacy." The smirk and her smiling and laughing seem to be a tic.

wild chicken said...

I don't think people like being told they're racist. But they're pretty sure those other people are. So I guess the trick is making them think it's about other people.

But when asked to confess their sins, will it still be about other people? I think so. "I will fake-confess so others will come clean."

Anyway, it must be godawful to be a cop in these urban crime zones. Viet Cong territory! Watch yer back!

Mike Sylwester said...

Superb, amusing analysis, Ann.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Brand Identification is firmly established. Goes without saying.

OldManRick said...

I don't knw why anyone would take what Harris says in a debate seriously after she admitted that she was just "debating" when she trashed Biden in the primary debates and now says she didn't mean it. She has demonstrated and admitted that she will say anything that she thinks is to her advantage in a debate including lies, non answers, and empty promises.

That's Kamala Harris in a nutshell - lies, non answers, and empty promises.

Sebastian said...

"Taylor was identified by her age, her occupation, and her city."

Not her involvement with drug dealers? Might that be relevant?

rehajm said...

Dems need to stop the slide of black voters switching GOP. It is the number one risk for the future of the Democrat party. The elites hoped riots and race baiting will fire up the black vote in their favor but their own polling says most black voters don't want soft on crime.

Kamala's answers match the political need. In that way Kamala's performance was good. Politicians gotta politician...

buwaya said...

That unobstructed wasteland of battle, the sand of the sacred arena, where the conflict is clean, undistracted, uncomplicated, and the outcome clear - we aren't going to find it in such places.

Todd said...

It would be just as productive to debate "Do unicorns exist?" or "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?".

Jupiter said...

"(which is, I think, what the Black Lives Matter movement would like us to do)"

Althouse, that is what the Black Lives Matter in your mind wants us to do. The one you feel would enable you to relieve your guilt over being a white person at a reasonable and quite bearable cost. Your imaginary Negro playmates, LaBorius and DaHellyusée.

BLM's founders openly state that they are Marxist revolutionaries. But it is obvious that they are merely tools of other people, older and wealthier, who could not care less about their lives or yours. And what they want us to do is submit. Utterly.

TreeJoe said...

From a substantive point, they were both weak...however: Harris painfully avoided her own actions and results. She deliberately disconnected the two and spoke to her actions and then future parallel policy plans, while Pence sought to actually talk about results over the past 3.5 years.

I really can't stand trump from a leadership and personal perspective. A great example is his complaining - not leading - on how to vote and vote safely this year. He should put forth a recommended solution, not just complain about fraud.

BUT....if I put aside the pandemic and pandemic response, on which there's evidence trump hasn't done great but no evidence that harris/biden would have done better, I have loved the results of the trump administration.

Yancey Ward said...

Harris didn't answer a single question with a substantive reply all night long, but then Page didn't really press her for one, either. This is the main problem with moderators- the only person on the stage who is going to press the issue of evasive answers, especially from the Democrat candidate is the debate opponent. In my opinion, the moderator shouldn't speak at all but to introduce the subject- just enforce a time's up red light with a mic cutoff switch. Give the candidates two minutes each to speak and then 1 minute of rebuttal time each for two or three rounds of rebuttal.

The moderators simply have too much power, and they actually destroy the intellectual value of the debate by trying to put their thumb's on the scale. Almost every single question Page asked last night was framed from a leftist's point of view- it is unfair and intellectually dishonest to boot. Here is how topics should be introduced:

Topic #1: "Explain how you would have dealt with the COVID-19 pandemic if you had been president in January 2020, and then explain how you will deal with it going forward from January 2021."

Topic #2: "Is the US systemically racist- explain your answer."

Topic #3: "Discuss the pros and cons of expanding the Supreme Court."

Topic #4: "Discuss the pros and cons of the Green New Deal."

Topic #5: "Discuss your plans to reform the US healthcare system."

Topic #6: "Discuss your plans for tax reform."

You get my point, right? Don't frame questions- just announce the topic and let the candidates frame their policies around it. And no different topics for the candidates. When you ask a question, you give the candidate the license to substantially ignore the question, which Harris did every single time, and Pence did a handful of times, but mostly because he felt the need to reply to Harris' change of subject and focus.

I am just tired of the moderators seeming inability to conduct a proper debate- what you end up with is a biased joint interview, which is not what a debate is supposed to be. The moderators consistently bias everything towards the Democratic candidate, believing that they are helping that candidate, but it only makes their preferred candidate look incredibly weak and destroys the actual value of the debate itself- getting to see the candidates think for themselves on their feet. Even worse, Harris clearly knew all the topics and the order in which they were coming- at one point she clearly knew what the next topic was before Page introduced it.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Taylor's boyfriend claims that he didn't hear the police announce themselves. More likely, he did but thought it was a ruse and he was going to be robbed. If you involve yourself in drug dealing then the chances of someone robbing and/or killing you goes way up. If he believed it was the police chances are he would have peacefully surrendered.

And those cops need way more time on the range. Twenty rounds and they only hit one of the two people in an apartment!

Nonapod said...

And her life was taken unjustifiably and tragically and violently.

So I guess she's saying that the jury got it wrong? In a more rational world if a political candidate were to make such an assertion they'd be required to actually provide a coherent argument as to exactly why they felt that the police actions were "unjustifiable". Instead we have a claim that is quickly made without any deconstruction or challenge by the supposed moderator, and then they quickly move on. It's one of the many reasons I absolutely despise these debates, the (D) candidate can say pretty much whatever they want without challenge.

Dave Begley said...

"The police said they identified themselves. Taylor’s boyfriend said he didn’t hear them do that."

A neighbor said he heard the police announce themselves. The boyfriend denied it. Of course! He's a criminal. And he fired first. The cops acted in self-defense and the grand jury so found.

Both the Taylor and Floyd case have been wildly misrepresented by the media.

Taylor's ex-boyfriend was a big time drug dealer. A dead body was found in a car rented in her name. The drug dealing boyfriend used her apartment as a drug safe house. Admit it. She was in the drug business for money. She was in the life.

Yes, she got caught in cross fire but she was hanging with criminals.

The media and BLM has pulled the same stunt that lawyer Ben Crump did for Travyon Martin: turned her into a secular saint when she was no such person.

Her family got $12m gross and they're still complaining. Boyfriend got zip because they weren't married.

The Floyd case is particularly egregious. Power Line posted an excellent video by a retired lawyer that used to prosecute cops.

1. Floyd had a 3x normal amount of fentanyl in his blood. He ingested it by "hooping." Look it up. He told the cops and they knew what it meant.

2. His lungs weighed 3x normal.

3. In the police car, he said he couldn't breathe. His lungs were filling at that point.

4. Looking closely at the video, the cop wasn't using all his weight to keep Floyd on the ground.

5. The submission method the cop used WAS approved.

6. Floyd was a career criminal; no secular saint.

Assuming arguendo we do have systemic racism in this country, then why hasn't Joe Biden fixed it in his 47 years in office? Could it be because, as alleged by Harris in the Dem debates, that Biden is a racist? He opposed school busing. Case closed.

wendybar said...

Jupiter said...
"(which is, I think, what the Black Lives Matter movement would like us to do)"

Althouse, that is what the Black Lives Matter in your mind wants us to do. The one you feel would enable you to relieve your guilt over being a white person at a reasonable and quite bearable cost. Your imaginary Negro playmates, LaBorius and DaHellyusée.

BLM's founders openly state that they are Marxist revolutionaries. But it is obvious that they are merely tools of other people, older and wealthier, who could not care less about their lives or yours. And what they want us to do is submit. Utterly.

10/8/20, 9:37 AM

THIS!! The Propagandists have repeated the lie so often, that it has become truth to the left like the Charlotteville lie, and the Russian Hoax. People need to turn off the Propaganda and research for themselves. BLM is a MARXIST group, and they have fooled the Progressives and made rioting and looting okay because it is for the cause.

PatHMV said...

I'm tired of these debates, and have been for 2 decades. The way they're set up, it ENCOURAGES the sound-bite shallowness that the media pretends to disdain. It's simply not possible to have a real debate with 2 minute time limits and so forth, and they force the moderator into a far more significant role than any moderator should play. It's time to do something different.

Jupiter said...

"Maybe she's not just "assuming," but she's considered the evidence in depth."

Althouse, that's what the Kamala Harris in your mind would do. Your imaginary Jamaico-Indian former prosecutor, who shares your concern for ethical behavior in the conduct of the Law's business, and the care needed to find truth in a complicated situation.

The real Kamala Harris is an utterly corrupt, race-hustling whore, who would say and do anything to anyone if she thought it might further her ambitions.

Kai Akker said...

It's still, at this late date, Fake It Till You Make It for her.

Kevin said...

Systemic racism is a way to say it's the system that's racist, not you.

But that's not what they really believe.

Joe and Kamala like to look into the camera and tell people about Trump. I want Kamala or Joe to look into the camera and tell America that all of you people out there in TV land are inherently racist.

That's really the justification for the laws they want to pass, the courts they want to pack, the ballots they want to throw out, and the power they want to hold.

Joe Biden says his campaign is because he believes Donald Trump is a racist.

His policies are because he believes YOU are.

bagoh20 said...

"Here comes the litany that makes Trump haters sure he's a racist and Trump defenders feel that these are all distortions and lies."

One side is clearly correct on that, and the other is lying, and it has been proven over and over. It's not just a difference of opinion. It's a lie, and they know they are lying.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

what about "Systemic Face-ism" ?

Jessica Valenti says Kamala's faces won the debate--

"Perfectly toned and timed"https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ejx-oEbXkAMMPHz?format=jpg&name=medium

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ejx-oEbXkAMMPHz?format=jpg&name=medium

Kamala is a Faceist!

Kai Akker said...

I enjoyed the close Althouse analysis, btw. So neither one of them wanted to go anywhere near the fact that Breonna Taylor chose to throw in her lot with a big-time drug dealer, hold his money and maybe his inventory, and then when she had the better BF in there with her instead one night, got the bad consequences of all those earlier poor decisions.

Phil 314 said...

Is there any evidence that Officer Chauvin was brutal to Mr. Floyd because he was black?

As a corollary if we will always see racism when a white officer arrests, injures or shoots a black citizen then we are doomed to either permanent “systematic racism” or complete segregation in society.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

check out who makes up the background

Portrait of Kamala Done In Faces of Those She Incarcerated

Dave Begley said...

This post is classic Althouse and shows what a rigorous thinker and analyst she is.

bagoh20 said...

If you think BLM is about Black lives, you are uninformed, and being scammed by a group that knows exactly how to play you and your misguided white guilt. Many Blacks disagree with BLM, and the a lot more would if they knew what the organization is really about. BLM is Marxists that figured out how to get people to support them who otherwise would never do so. Pretending to be about racism gets you Blacks and Whites who would never otherwise support communism, and it gets a built-in defense mechanism where abandoning the movement makes you either uncaring about your race or a white racist. Don't be a sucker.

bagoh20 said...

"Notice that Page did not mention race at all."

That's because it's entirely unnecessary. Everyone assumes she's Black, because we all know instinctively that we wouldn't even know about her if she was White.

Fritz said...

Michael K said...
Harris lied repeatedly, not just the one about "white supremacy." The smirk and her smiling and laughing seem to be a tic.


A poker player would call it a tell.

tim maguire said...

Today was another day when I couldn't make it through my NYT email update. They harped about Pence's "lies" and included a long list of things that...none of which were lies. Literally, not one. Not to say that they were all "true," though most were. Some were just shading meaning or "Pence said Trump respects veterans, but he once insulted John McCain"--that was one of their "Pence lies"!

Meanwhile, Harris engaged in some standard political hyperbole, but told no lies. Says the newspaper of record.

Iman said...

Mick Pence says "Not true," but she continues:

“Mick”? ISWYDT

Todd said...

wendybar said...

She is a blatant liar. She "claims" they won't stop fracking. There are videos of Joe Biden saying that they will. She had the talking points down great. That's all they have. I am so glad Trump won't do the farce of a virtual debate because you just KNOW, Joe will be fed the questions and the answers. They have nothing. They are the party of the rioting and violence going on right now. WHY won't they denounce it???

10/8/20, 9:11 AM


And, like China did with the VP debate, Trump's mike will have unexplained intermittent problems and signal loss...

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

invite us to understand and share the belief in an enlightened new way (which is, I think, what the Black Lives Matter movement would like us to do)?

Is the Althouse Whitesplaining being a white savior or Whitewashing BLM.

Look at who and what BLM is. It is an open and proud marxist revolutionary organization.

elkh1 said...

Trump is racist, he tries to enslave blacks again: he makes blacks work for a paycheck instead of giving them a welfare check for not working.

Fernandinande said...

Systemic racism is why Asians are 3.4 times more likely than whites to score over 1400 on their SATs, and are about 3.4 times less likely to be killed by police than whites.

buwaya said...

"they are merely tools of other people, older and wealthier"

Older and wealthier and much whiter.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

marched shoulder to shoulder, arm in arm, [and]fighting

No social distancing! OMG the science!! Grandma killers!!!!!

Fucking hypocrites.

unknown said...

I find it amusing when people think of Kamala as a prosecutor, as if she was toiling away in obscurity until her excellence was recognized and she rose to a career in politics. She feeds into it by pretending to act like a prosecutor character she probably saw on Law & Order or something. It’s so hacky.

Did she ever handle any cases? I’m sure she did. Was she any good as a prosecutor? I have my doubts. She was a politician from the start and that’s what defined her career as an ADA and DA in SF and as California AG.

Having watched her for years, I honestly have difficulty imagining her handling and winning a tough jury trial where the evidence is anything less than a slam dunk.

Fernandinande said...

Is there any evidence that Officer Chauvin was brutal to Mr. Floyd because he was black?

I don't think there is any good evidence that he was brutal to Floyd.

Anyway, Chauvin is out on bail. I feel mostly badly for the guy who was on the police force for only 3 days before he charged with "aiding and abetting".

mockturtle said...

Jupiter is right about BLM being Marxist. If you read Marx's Das Kapital and substitute 'race' for 'class' you will see it. Same weltanschauung, different name.

TreeJoe said...

If Pence was sharper, he would have pointed out that Kamala Harris' comments on a "few bad cops" is indicative she doesn't believe in systemic racism. Either the system is bad and most cops are therefore bad, executing bad policies, or it's limited. Can't be both.

He did however hold her and Biden accountable for the fact that they are willing to pack the court if they don't get their way through the elected representatives currently in office.

And, equally, she did a very nice vignette about President Lincoln and his choices.

bagoh20 said...

I don't understand with all the lies they repeat so easily, that lying about fracking and packing the courts is something they avoid. I guess they assume that their base knows they are lying and accept that as a strategy to not lose votes.

mockturtle said...

Harris tells us that Breonna Taylor wanted to be a nurse. Her affiliation with drug dealers would have been clearly problematic.

tim maguire said...

Phil 314 said...Is there any evidence that Officer Chauvin was brutal to Mr. Floyd because he was black?

No. But get this: Chauvin and Floyd knew each other! They both worked at the same bar, they have a personal history. How much have you heard about that in the media coverage?

unknown said...

I guess what I’m saying is she really doesn’t understand criminal justice issues as well as many people assume. I’ve known supposedly competent career prosecutors who still blow deadlines, make egregious mistakes and can’t understand the plain English in a statute or a case. I really don’t think Kamala would be able to drawn on her experience to speak authoritatively, or even intelligently, about the ins and outs of the Breonna Taylor investigation.

Does she know anything about narcotics investigations and how police execute search warrants in such cases?

Does she know anything about the law of self defense?

Does she know anything about the decisional law setting forth the constitutional limits on police using deadly force?

Does she know how a grand jury functions? Has she ever even presented a case to a grand jury?

bagoh20 said...

Pence is the perfect Vice President for Trump.
1) It's a good cop/bad cop dynamic that works.
2) Knowing how voters always tire of the guy in office after eight years, Pence is different enough from Trump to satisfy that automatic need for change after Trump is done.

Jupiter said...

"BLM is Marxists that figured out how to get people to support them who otherwise would never do so"

I think it is rather that they figured out how to make it costly for people who would very much like to oppose them to do so effectively. Silly white women do "support" them, in droves. Or maybe "herds" is the correct collective. "Pods"? But more important is that anyone who openly attacks them can immediately be accused, tried and found guilty of "racism". This is why their owners purchased them.

Michael K said...

It's interesting that a memo went out right after the debate telling all the TV folks how to explain Harris' weak performance. It also tells you who won the debate.

It was "mansplaining" by Pence.

Every single one used the same term.

Wilbur said...

"We need reform of our policing in America and our criminal justice system, which is why Joe and I will immediately ban choke holds and carotid holds."

A career prosecutor should know that "Joe and I" do not have the constitutional authority to do that. She must think that "Joe and I" will rule by executive order.

bagoh20 said...

How does a man debate a woman without "mansplaining"?

Answer: He lets her win.

The media is like flock of parrots that all learn the same new word each day.

Francisco D said...

I appreciate Althouse giving a synopsis of that part of the debate. I have only watched snippets, and that is one that I missed.

Pence strikes me as plodding and passionless, but a decent guy. He cleaned her clock on that question.

As I have stated repeatedly, only a small percentage of people will judge the debate on the basis of merit. It mostly comes down to appearances.

Does anyone here think that Kamala appears to be someone you would want to have a beer with, much less a conversation? Pence is boring but Harris is really off putting with her condescending and entitled attitude,

Chennaul said...

Welp. That is all you get America.

She will be the most powerful person in the land because Joe Biden has to put a lid on his campaign almost every day.

The media cannot even force more out of him because they have absolutely zero leverage.

America is racist and they deserve this Canadian raised gal who thinks and tells them that daily. Your betters have decided that.

The American experiment with antifa mobilized in the streets....looks like a Banana Republic.

This is how elections are won now.

(I actually think Ann is wrong about the fly— it flew off when Kamala said “tiki torch”.)

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The leftwing media buzzword is "mansplaining"

How lame.
and Nazi.

n.n said...

Structural racism is a subset of structural diversity (i.e. color judgments) or class rather than principled-based (e.g. character) judgments.

AlbertAnonymous said...

So joe and Kamala are going to ban chokeholds ?

Couldn’t they have done that while she was a senator and he was VP?

And then Kamala says if they had that ban, George Floyd would be alive today.

Bull Fucking Shit missy! George Floyd died of a massive intake of fentanyl.

Here’s an idea. Why don’t Joe and Kamala ban resisting arrest. That seems to play a part in virtually all of these incidents.

Gotta say though that Pence hit her record hard on how she treated blacks as DA and AG. Finally.

As with everything else, she’d full of shit on that issue.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

"And people around our country of every race, of every age, of every gender, perfect strangers to each other, marched shoulder to shoulder, arm in arm"

And here I thought Harris was part of "the Party of Science" that supports social distancing.

You want to know why people call "BS" on the calls for social distance / mask wearing? This is it.

You want social distancing? You don't celebrate ANYONE walking "arm in arm" with people outside their household.

Your political goals are more important that social distancing?

Then STFU about it, because my life goals are more important than your political goals

mikee said...

Systemic racism is an amazing thing. It can explain any issue in favor of marxist, collectivist, totalitarian progressive solutions. Almost as if it is the marxist, collectivist, totalitarian progressive solution that is the driving force for finding systemic racism everywhere, in everything and everyone, rather than reality.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

TreeJoe said...
I really can't stand trump from a leadership and personal perspective. A great example is his complaining - not leading - on how to vote and vote safely this year. He should put forth a recommended solution, not just complain about fraud.

He HAS put forward a recommended solution: No one gets an absentee ballot unless they personally request it.

The Democrats have refused to follow that common sense proposal.

So, short of sending in the US Army to stop the Democrats from pushing this sort of vote fraud, exactly what is he supposed to do?

n.n said...

"Taylor was identified by her age, her occupation, and her city."

Not her involvement with drug dealers? Might that be relevant?


Nor that her boyfriend reacted to the officers knocking and announcement with "hands forward shoot first", thereby endangering the lives of the officers and public. Taylor was, at best, collateral damage of his rush to judgment and affirmative protest.

madAsHell said...

Systemic racism? You mean, like Affirmative Action?

n.n said...

Trump is racist, he tries to enslave blacks again:

Trump is Pro-Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness, without exercising liberal license to indulge diversity, let alone structural diversity. He places people, natural imperatives, then reconciles, before color judgments.

rhhardin said...

The only white supremacists I know of are black and live in Africa, and are trying to get to white-run countries.

walter said...

Kai Akker said...It's still, at this late date, Fake It Till You Make It for her.
--
Brown, Willie most hurt.

TreeJoe said...

Tangent:

I'm shocked and saddened by how weak Pence and Trump have been on their pandemic response defense. Yes, this is a terrible pandemic. Yes, it's literally claimed about 200,000 lives - almost all unhealthy 70-75+ year olds (side note: Sadly, for the wrong reasons, I expect our national healthcare expenditures to be lower in future years by a reasonable tick as a result)

The point isn't how terrible this pandemic has been. The EU, Canada, South America are a testament to how it pretty much became impossible to contain.

The point is: Name a single thing Kamala/Joe took a leading stand on throughout this pandemic BEFORE the trump admin had already done it, that would have produced a meaningfully different result.

There's nothing. In fact, there's evidence of the opposite. They are monday morning quarterbacking in the worst way.

They should be called out for this combination of lack of leadership + the worst type of "I could do it better"-ism despite not actually taking any different positions when it mattered.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Ron Winkleheimer said...
Taylor's boyfriend claims that he didn't hear the police announce themselves. More likely, he did but thought it was a ruse and he was going to be robbed. If you involve yourself in drug dealing then the chances of someone robbing and/or killing you goes way up. If he believed it was the police chances are he would have peacefully surrendered.

1: Taylor and boyfriend were in bed when the cops arrived. They were in the hallway by the time the cops broke in

So, the cops did not just break down the door. Good
The cops came in the middle of the night, pounded on the door, and broke in. I watched a Twitter thread where someone posted multiple cases where criminals pounded on the door, claiming to be cops, and then broke in to a house.

These kind of midnight raids are BS, and have gotten a lot of innocent people killed. They should end. Unless it's a known gang hangout where you expect multiple armed people to be there and resist arrest, or the police have strong evidence of ongoing criminal activity against a victim at that location, the police should be required to serve all such warrants in the day, when people can be expected to be awake.

So that part is bad

And that part is what got Taylor killed.

Because shooting a bunch of people who break into your house in the middle of teh night IS the correct response. Especially if you're a law-abiding person who doesn't expect the cops to be invading your house (note: he had a registered gun. He therefore does not have a criminal record.)

The ex-boyfriend was involved in drugs. The boyfriend was not.

rcocean said...

This is what drives me crazy. what the fuck does B. Taylor have to do with who we are choosing as President and VP of the USA? Page does NOT ask about packing the SCOTUS or the filibuster OR immigration OR trade Policy OR the BLM/Antifa riots that caused over 50 deaths and 2 Billion in damages OR the current relief bill.

Instead, she talks about ONE PERSON who got killed by police in Kentucky! Incredible. And then she goes on and asks about fucking Climate Change, which no cares about, and then Russians and the elections and what we'll do if Rove v. wade is ever overturned (a fantasy question).

We have serious problems, and the Press does NOT want to talk about it. What's more important then packing the SCOTUS, admitting 2 news states, and getting rid of the filibuster? But no questions on that. Too boring. Lets talk about George FLoyd & Ms. Taylor.

rcocean said...

I don't know if this is left-wing bias, or whether the American people just want an entertainment show. Certainly, the questions asked by Page and wallace have done almost zero to enlighten the American public on the candidates stand on important issues. No, lets talk about "White Supremacy" and "B.Taylor".

bagoh20 said...

What is an example of systemic racism in America?

rcocean said...

And Pence blew the answer on Charlottesville. At some point, he should have counter-attacked. when are R's going to learn you can't just let the D's call you racists over and over and over again. The constant "gosh, we're not racists, no one hates racism more than we do" is a defensive response and LOSES!

hombre said...

If we include Harris’ provable lies as negatives this was pretty much an ass-kicking by Pence. Does cruel neutrality compel the Professor to talk about eyelashes or fly-in-hair rather than acknowledge that? Or, can we expect a last few weeks charge from her to justify the Democrats next to worst ticket in history?

Just speculatin’.

Joe Smith said...

@Wendybar

"BLM is a MARXIST group, and they have fooled the Progressives and made rioting and looting okay because it is for the cause."

You got a major detail wrong. They didn't fool the progressives. This is what the progressives have wanted all along.

Peas in a pod...

joetote said...

I wish he had pointed out the fact that the stalwart ex AG of Commiefoinia was caught withholding evidence in cases she handled as AG. It is documented but unspoken

Jupiter said...

"Now, she's shifting to the story of George Floyd, presumably because the police behavior is more clearly wrong,"

No, because the lies the Press have told about this case are more outrageous. If you actually want to know what happened to George Floyd, this video will tell you; Who Killed George Floyd?

BTW, Derek Chauvin posted $1,000,000.00 bail today, and left prison. Kamala Harris did not donate to his bail fund. The Left Fascists believe that only criminals should be released from prison.

Breezy said...

Well said, Kevin @ 9:48!

Sigivald said...

I will not sit here and be lectured by the Vice President on what it means to enforce the laws of our country. The only one on this stage, who has personally prosecuted everything from child sexual assault to homicide.

Isn't she also the only one who defended corrupt prosecutorial practices and was happy to put innocent people in prison for political points?

chickelit said...

Kamala Harris can be excused for any mistakes she made last night by simply remembering her own words: "It was a debate! A debate."

Kai Akker said...

Is there any evidence that Officer Chauvin was brutal to Mr. Floyd because he was black? [Phil 314]

Is there any evidence that Officer Chauvin was brutal to Mr. Floyd? Does it not matter to you that the restraint technique used was an approved technique? Do you think it was just random cruelty? Or stupid medical advice on employing it?

Left Bank of the Charles said...

The injustice is that the three Louisville police officers fired 32 shots into Breonna Taylor's apartment without really knowing who or what they were shooting at, and as a result killed an innocent person and endangered several others.

There was an even greater hail of police bullets in the apprehension of Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev back in 2013, but he wasn't innocent.

So innocence is at least relevant to how we think about the question of justice in these police shootings. I have seen a lot of commenters here impugn Breonna Taylor and George Floyd, and Trayvon Martin if we go back the beginnings of Black Lives Matter - they think that is relevant.

Kai Akker said...

LOL, Walter

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

Not that it was too difficult to imagine--
our post from last Saturday:

"Harris shows willingness to bring fresh ideas and leadership,
while Pence's mansplaining, racism, and white privilege surfaced
during the VP debate."

James Pawlak said...

There is "Systematic Racism" in the USA. It is inflicted by Black thugs who select-out, on the basis of race, White victims at a rate many, many, times the reverse.

This has been mathematically demonstrated by a Professor John McAdams of Marquette Universit.

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

BLM's complete name is "Black Lives Matter, But Only When They Advances Our Marxist Agenda."

J. Farmer said...

@bagoh20:

What is an example of systemic racism in America?

I think there are a couple that are important. The first is interpersonal and works like this: (1) stereotypes are generally based in truth, (2) stereotypes will cause some amount of prejudice, (3) members of groups that have historically experienced prejudice will have difficulty attributing feedback (e.g. ambiguity over someone's motives, intentions, sincerity, etc. (4) And because fairness is an important value, resentments are inevitable.

The other one is socioeconomic: (1) Black Americans have lower mean IQ scores than European Americans, (2) Your IQ is not something that you earn or achieve. (3) Post-industrialization and mass immigration have worsened the economic prospects of Americans with limited cognitive abilities. (4) A meritocratic system where advancement is largely based on academic performance and standardized test scores, blacks are at a structural disadvantage to other racial groups. (5) And because fairness is an important value, resentments are inevitable.

n.n said...

BTW, Derek Chauvin posted $1,000,000.00 bail today,

Good for him and everyone who stood for civil rights.

n.n said...

if Rove v. wade is ever overturned (a fantasy question)

Not necessarily. It may yet be returned to the States. However, unlike the Communists' one-child, the Progressives' selective-child policy was legalized under the Twilight Amendment and normalized (e.g. social progress) under their Pro-Choice quasi-religion ("ethics"), and as such will not be overturned through a mere legal change. Women, and men, have four choices, and will need to lose their Pro-Choice quasi-religion to share/shift responsibility and alleviate their "burden" h/t Obama.

mockturtle said...

My apologies to all the other commenters who identify the Marxist origins of the BLM movement. Jupiter's remark just happened to catch my eye.

This is too important a recognition to be ignored. I had personal experience in the radical politics of the late 60's and even then was aware of the Communist [not Socialist] infiltration of the Leftist protests. My involvement was based almost entirely on the Vietnam War which I thought [and still acknowledge] was a colossal waste of young life and limb. It is unfortunate that Communist agents were using this justifiable anger for their own devious ends. This might be a good time to join the John Birch Society, an organization about which we used to joke and snicker. They know what's going on.

Narr said...

"What is an example of systemic racism in America?"

Big-time university basketball and football programs.

Narr
Lefty-run, natch

n.n said...

Because shooting a bunch of people who break into your house in the middle of teh night IS the correct response. Especially if you're a law-abiding person who doesn't expect the cops to be invading your house (note: he had a registered gun. He therefore does not have a criminal record.)

That's a fair point, then the question become if his reaction was justified as self-defense.

The problem was not the officers, but the policies. And there is no evidence that diversity was a motive. The grand jury got it right. The press, protestors, and politicians were and are wrong.

n.n said...

What is an example of systemic racism in America?

Structural diversity, not limited to racism.

Francisco D said...

J. Farmer said: A meritocratic system where advancement is largely based on academic performance and standardized test scores, blacks are at a structural disadvantage to other racial groups.

A more general point is that people with lower IQs need to have jobs that give them a sense of purpose rather than living off welfare, disability, etc.

We have outsourced these jobs and need to bring them back to the US. It will raise the cost of goods and services, but it is a worthwhile price to pay.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

@Greg

I was unaware that the boy friend was a new one and was not involved with drug dealing. However, Breonna was at one time and thus upped her chances of getting killed. That's not a condemnation, its a factual statement akin to stating that smoking increases your chance of lung cancer. I agree that no knock warrants in the middle of the night shouldn't be used except in extra-ordinary circumstances.

Michael K said...

We have outsourced these jobs and need to bring them back to the US. It will raise the cost of goods and services, but it is a worthwhile price to pay.

That was actually a point that Harris made last night. She was against it.

Dave Begley said...

Francisco D has nailed it.

Why doesn't Nike open plants in Detroit, Chicago and Baltimore?

n.n said...

A more general point is that people with lower IQs need to have jobs that give them a sense of purpose rather than living off welfare, disability, etc.

If probably started with an IQ differential, motivated by labor and environmental arbitrage, but it has progressed to cause general harm. This is especially true for men, who, from Nature's perspective, are a complement to a woman, and, who, by choice, have the responsibility of being providers to their wife and children. It has also hurt women. Progressive confusion and reconciliation avoidance (i.e. Pro-Choice) are real issues on a forward-looking basis in a minority of the population.

We have outsourced these jobs and need to bring them back to the US. It will raise the cost of goods and services, but it is a worthwhile price to pay.

Labor and environmental arbitrage matter. Productive lives matter. Men and women do not live by bread and water, nor thrive by sweets and everything nice alone.

J. Farmer said...

@mockturtle:

Jupiter is right about BLM being Marxist. If you read Marx's Das Kapital and substitute 'race' for 'class' you will see it. Same weltanschauung, different name.

This isn't true at all. There is no way to get from classical or even orthodox Marxism to current identity politics. To the degree that there is any "Marxism" in contemporary identity politics, it's very loosely influenced by Western Marxism in Germany, which was a very different endeavor than what Marx pursued. They were a break from Marx. But more significantly it is influenced by a French critique of "structuralism," a methodology for analyzing human culture.

Rusty said...

"And because fairness is an important value." No it's not. Less unfairness is an important value. There is a difference.
" A meritocratic system where advancement is largely based on academic performance and standardized test scores, blacks are at a structural disadvantage to other racial groups."
Hispanics might argue that.
But you're on one of you can't be reasoned with rolls so I'll leave you to it.

Bunkypotatohead said...

I'm voting for the fly.

bagoh20 said...

Systemic racism needs to be designed into the system to discriminate for it to be racist. There has to be some racism involved, not just uneven challenges that happen to exists naturally. Is skin cancer racist?, sickle cell anemia? Is motherhood sexist? Total equality is impossible due to nature, not the system we developed. The system often helps to alleviate inequality. There are ways for the system to be racist or sexist, but the ones I know of today mostly discriminate against Whites, Asians, and Men. That is, the system disadvantages them on purpose based on their race or sex. i don't consider biases inside the minds of individuals to be "the system". "The system" involves, law, structure, social norms, etc.

Howard said...

You people can feel it slipping away.

bagoh20 said...

BLM isn't identity politics. That's just the disguise they are using. It's a disguise and a weapon. Which do you think they would go for: Racial equality, but under capitalism or racial inequality under communism. If you listen to their goals, it's clear that race is not what motivates them, but they won't get the NBA, or the DC mayor for example, to paint "Communism" on the court or the street, and they wouldn't be getting all the money and support they are if they were honest.

J. Farmer said...

@Rusty:

No it's not. Less unfairness is an important value. There is a difference.

You're right there's a difference, and we're talking about two different things. Because people value being treated fairly, when they are not, it often causes a negative emotional response. Over time it's these reactions that can foster a sense of resentment.

Hispanics might argue that.
But you're on one of you can't be reasoned with rolls so I'll leave you to it.


I can always be reasoned with, assuming you have something reasonable to say. "Hispanic" isn't a racial group. Latinos have varying degrees of European, African, and Native American (e.g. mulatto, mestizo). They, too, are at a structural disadvantage, but it's not as bad as the black-white gap, usually falling somewhere between, and Hispanics don't have the same history as blacks.

J. Farmer said...

@bagoh20:

That is, the system disadvantages them on purpose based on their race or sex. i don't consider biases inside the minds of individuals to be "the system". "The system" involves, law, structure, social norms, etc.

Holding all racial groups to the same cognitive standards is like holding men and women to the same physical standards. That's why we have sex-segregated sports, but we can't have race-segregated standards. That's why we're stuck.

Maillard Reactionary said...

J. Farmer @12:10 PM: I agree that there is some merit in your points, but it is a stretch to call them "racism". To me, "racism" means dismissing or denying people's individuality (humanity) solely because of their race. (Which by the way is something that white people are on the receiving end of quite a bit, and are expected to just suck it up and keep quiet about it.) I simply don't see any intentional dehumanization in what you describe.

You acknowledge that stereotypes usually have some basis in truth. In this case, two key stereotypes about blacks follow from (1) the outlandish level of criminal behavior in the black population (leading to the stereotype that blacks are dangerous to be around and a poor bet to take a chance on), and (2) the indifference that many blacks exhibit in acquiring useful (legal) skills, such as (for a start) learning how to read and write English (leading to the stereotype that blacks are ignorant and lazy). Naturally, these stereotypes lead to negative outcomes, and nobody likes those. But the basis of these stereotypes are choices made by blacks, not accidents of biology or the outcomes of bad behavior by white people. Why do so few in positions of influence not simply encourage blacks to do better? No one needs a high IQ to be a good citizen and a good parent. Do they think blacks incapable of it?

The only "systemic racism" that I see is the condescending racism that denies blacks their human agency (with the concomitant responsibility it entails), and which explicitly or in effect encourages their self-destructive behavior by tolerating e.g. filthy language, petty criminality, treating others disrespectfully, irresponsible personal behavior (especially that of abandoning one's children), etc., etc., and blaming all of this nonperformance on white people.

I also think that Francisco D nails it, as a more productive way to think about this issue. We are not going to give up our technological civilization, and higher-IQ people will always have a leg up in certain kinds of work, simply because they are the only ones who can do it. But we need to think about all of our citizens, not just the "cognitive elite". This requires a change of mindset in the policymaking class so that they recognize the reality of human differences and make public policy accordingly. Unfortunately, they are so thoroughly and uniformly indoctrinated in social Marxist blank-slate thinking that it is difficult to imagine this changing any time soon. Not to mention the advantages to certain politicians and parties of having a permanently dependent (if resentful) underclass that is easily bribed for votes with promises of "free stuff", special treatment, and the settling of scores.

mockturtle said...

Farmer, can't you take any comment at face value??? You know very well that I mean that, in today's leftist vernacular, 'white' is similar to 'capitalist' in Marxist philosophy. You're just an obsessive-compulsive hair splitter. :-)

n.n said...

Systemic racism needs to be designed into the system to discriminate for it to be racist.

Exactly. Neither the Declaration nor the Constitution exercise liberal license to indulge Progressives' diversity dogma, not limited to racism, sexism.

Drago said...

Howard: "You people can feel it slipping away."

BTW, have you ever explained how it was that you went from praising your Howard's Heroes 24/7 and criticizing law enforcement action against them for month after month after month only to then shift, like flipping a lightswitch, to a new narrative that your Howard's Heroes never really existed at all?

I mean, did you think no one would notice?

n.n said...

Why do so few in positions of influence not simply encourage blacks to do better?

The community leaders are racists a la Hutu/Tutsi, post-apartheid Progressive South Africa, Swaziland following in the footsteps of their African ancestors. Democrats exploit diversity and adversity for political, social, and economic leverage, and to intimidate dissenters and competitors with purpose of forcing them to kneel.

Maillard Reactionary said...

mockturtle @5:00 PM: You are correct. The failed Marxist "dialectic" or conflict between the the working class and the investor/businessman class (I refuse to use the Marxist term "capitalist"), which never materialized, has been replaced by another "dialectic" between Designated Oppressor Groups and Designated Victim Groups. I, and I suspect you, are members of a Designated Oppressor Group (DOG). It's a DOG's life, and it is not pleasant.

Marxism feeds on the worst aspects of human nature (envy, resentment, nihilism, hunger for revenge, ingratitude, etc) and exploits them to enable a small group of enthusiastic psychopaths to become wealthy and powerful at the expense of society at large. The side effects of the above have been documented amply by many survivors who lived under it in the 20th century. On the whole probably one of the most destructive products of human ingenuity of all time.

Marxism is like crack cocaine to a certain kind of intellectual. Once they've tried it, it's really hard to kick. It seems to do something irreversible to your brain.

Perhaps euthanasia would be the best way to handle it [joke].

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Howard said...
You people can feel it slipping away.

Projecting again, Howie?

https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/10/08/seventh-circuit-court-of-appeals-blocks-another-late-change-in-election-laws-in-wisconsin/

Yesterday the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued an opinion finding that the Legislature was authorized by state law to litigate on behalf of Wisconsin when the constitutionality of a validly passed statute is at issue, and the Attorney General declines to defend the statute....

With that clarification in hand, the Wisconsin Legislature ... asked the Seventh Circuit to rule on its petition for an Emergency Stay blocking Judge Conley’s order from going into effect for the Nov. election. Earlier today the Seventh Circuit granted the motion for reconsideration and found in favor of the Legislature with regard to its challenge of Judge Conley’s order.

With Cal's implosion, your chances of taking teh Senate are pretty much null. With Appeals Courts consistently staying Obama judge election re-write orders, how are you guys going to steal the election?

Is that flop sweat I see, Howard?

n.n said...

That's why we have sex-segregated sports, but we can't have race-segregated standards. That's why we're stuck.

There is a moral and natural imperative to recognize the equal and complementary nature of men and women. This offers a compelling cause for society to recognize the achievements of each sex: male and female, separately as man and woman, respectively. There is no justification for the current policy of diversity that indulges color judgments, counts colors, 1/2, 1/4, 1/16, not people. Diversity breeds adversity. We are an American race that share common principles, blood, and geography. To get unstuck, the diversitists need to lose their Pro-Choice quasi-religion, their wicked solutions... perhaps we are stuck.

Narr said...

Stuck = Doomed

T or F?

Narr
Show your work

The Godfather said...

@ Mallard Reactionary: You claim: "two key stereotypes about blacks follow from (1) the outlandish level of criminal behavior in the black population (leading to the stereotype that blacks are dangerous to be around and a poor bet to take a chance on), and (2) the indifference that many blacks exhibit in acquiring useful (legal) skills, such as (for a start) learning how to read and write English (leading to the stereotype that blacks are ignorant and lazy)."

But your point (1) (if true) applies almost exclusively to Male blacks, and your point (2) in your own words only applies to "many" blacks, but I assume not all. I submit that what you describe are cultural, not racial characteristics. My Yankee ancestors may have said similar things about my Irish ancesors -- and my German ancestors may have said them about both the Irish and the Yankees.

The point is that we should not assume that negative characteristics of certain groups are inherent, and so cannot be changed.

Jeff said...

Many studies have shown that black IQs are generally lower than white IQs. It matters a great deal whether this is due to genetics or culture, since nothing much can be done yet to change the genes of people once they've been conceived.

If the lower IQ of blacks is due to genetic differences, we would expect to see studies demonstrating that the IQ of blacks in America is related to how African their genes are. That is, almost all blacks in this country have some white ancestors and some black ancestors. Where are the studies showing that IQ is higher for those with more white ancestry?

On the other hand, if IQ differences between races are cultural in origin, and there are only two cultures, one black and one white, then we would expect to see that it doesn't matter how black you are genetically, only that you're culturally black. To my non-expert eyes, this appears to be the more likely explanation of what we see.

Maillard Reactionary said...

The Godfather: Agreed, those are cultural and not inherent biological characteristics. Which is why in principle at least, we can expect or at least hope for black people to do better, in cases where their behavior conforms to those stereotypes. Do we not expect that of everyone else?

And of course, we are only talking about stereotypes here: heuristic guesses about strangers, based on past experience, for lack of better information. This is a hard-wired characteristic of human social behavior, universal across times and places, that is not going away, and is not only useful but genuinely essential. For myself, I am always delighted to meet another human being that I feel some common interest with, regardless of their race, occupation, or social class. I would claim that most people, Americans especially, are quick to revise their stereotyped views of strangers of different races once they discover they are wrong in their initial guess. If they won't do that, such behavior merits the label of racism.


Maillard Reactionary said...

Jeff: If you've not already done so, I'd recommend that you read "The Bell Curve" by Murray and Herrnstein, which deals extensively with questions like yours. It's out of print but readily available on the used market. In short they reluctantly come to the conclusion that the evidence supports some biological or genetic difference that accounts for the bulk of the observed test results.

That said, it stands to reason that a culture that emphasizes what we might call traditional bourgeois values, as opposed to the dysfunctional ghetto/gangster culture, will result in better life outcomes no matter where a person falls in the IQ distribution.