Just that you agree with everything substantive the people you're criticising are basing their arguments on.

I'm of the opinion that how things are articulated matters as does the reason for doing it. I'm not interested in the colour of the people that are being impacted by economic redistribution because I don't care what your skin colour is.

I don't care what your skin colour is. — Judaka

No one disagreeing with you is saying that you care about skin colour.

Everyone disagreeing with you is simply saying that poverty does. The policies, history and institutional practices that make poverty and disadvantage continue to split along race lines - that's systemic racism.

Not about you and what you do or do not see.

1. I don't know — Judaka

You don't know whether in the past 450 years many white people were enslaved or not based on the colour of their skin?

You don't know whether in the past 450 years white men were not allowed to vote because they were male?

That wasn't your question you utter moron. You asked:

What number of white males have been confronted with negative consequences as a result from the colour of their skin or being a man in the past 450 years in the USA? — Benkei

Look at what you just said now.

You don't know whether in the past 450 years many white people were enslaved or not based on the colour of their skin? — Benkei

You went from what number of white males have been confronted with negative consequences to whether or not they were enslaved. You want me to respect your intelligence? You are out of your mind. You're a real piece of work.

You misrepresented both my arguments and the arguments used against me. You never fail to meet the expectations I've got for you fdrake. I wouldn't dare deny that slavery and racism have ripple effects that are hugely responsible for the wealth gap today. Nor would I deny that there is contemporary systemic racism in many large institutions both public and private which sustain or increase the gap. Nor did I ever utter such nonsense.

I never said economic redistribution alone would solve the problem of systemic racism. I replied to Benkei's post about how economic redistribution for the purpose of repairing damage whites have caused blacks. You can read his thread and make what you want of it. Another piece of work giving me grief.

I was fine with a ballpark figure.

I take it you agree then that white men, compared to women and black people, were in fact not disenfranchised or discriminated against in any meaningful numbers?

A ballpark figure? Of how many black people were confronted with negative consequences due to their skin colour over the last 450 years? And how many women suffered from sexism? You give me a ballpark figure, I won't talk to you anymore until you do. I want you to appreciate at least a little how stupid your questions were rather than trying to put on a show.

Approximately zero white men. Your turn.

I take it you agree then that white men, compared to women and black people, were in fact not disenfranchised or discriminated against in any meaningful numbers? — Benkei

That’s a pretty sleazy sentence. And a lame answer.

Right? I was half joking with my insults towards him but I actually didn't go far enough. He nagged me to answer his questions and I answer them. He tells me I didn't and changed his question completely, ignores half of my answers and then ignores my question while pretending like he didn't do anything wrong. I'd be mad if it wasn't funny.

Policies, history, institutional practices perpetuating poverty and disadvantage splitting along race lines is a current reality and a major problem.

Y/N?

Is that perpetuation of poverty and disadvantage splitting along race lines an injustice?

Y/N?

Are the people who are in positions of power actively administrating the perpetuation of these injustices and otherwise failing to address them almost exclusively white men?

Y/N?

I read @Benkei's essay and his posts in this thread. I think you're being quite uncharitable. If you're happy saying that poverty and disadvantage split along race lines, there's the other end of the split; wealth and advantage, and they're white men. Non-whites disadvantaged, whites advantaged. I'm pretty sure you agree with that. And I'm pretty sure you'd say Y to those things above.

What matters for the thread topic is whether and how state-economic conditions behave like fractionating columns for skin melanin content. And you seem to agree that it does.

It just seems you're getting angry that Benkei's called a spade a spade.

It's cute how those who are not regularly murdered everyday on the basis of their skin color get to explain how skin color does not matter. — StreetlightX

It's extremist quotes like this that just don't reflect reality and ignore the fact that more whites have been killed by cops,(which means that if one black is murdered everyday, then two whites are murdered everyday), is the reason why the solution will turn to violence rather than talking about it. Your posts are equivalent to what I see on FB and Twitter.

Better question for this thread is, is questioning the existence of systemic racism in the US, an act of racism itself? — Benkei

How religious. When a white person disagrees with a black person on anything, the white person is racist. This is like saying that if you don't agree that God exists you are a sinner.

The problem is that you haven't defined your God - the systemic racism that exists. If you can't define it, then how do you expect anyone to know what you are talking about to agree with?

Alright, so why do you two bother? I'm curious what you hope to get out of engaging with the levels of dishonesty and delusions you’ve been confronted with. That Benkei guy couldnt have been more clear about how useless it is respond to his dishonest nonsense yet you persist.
Why are you bothering? Nothing productive will come from this thread or the other on race, they arent discussions they are echo chambers. I mean, Judaka even said it was a waste of time to resoond but kept doing it. What are either of you getting out of it?

Dont ask me, Im too shallow to understand what I am being told, and an over-privileged white animal with a despicable education at a useless shithole called Oxford.

I'm done talking about Benkei, I was more charitable with what he wrote until he made it worse in this thread. That being said, I would have expected you to more or less agree with him based on my opinion about you. Yes to all of your statement/questions.

Systemic racism is a separate problem than what I was discussing with Benkei, you've misunderstood and you aren't trying to address it but I don't want you to address it, you should just drop it.

As for systemic racism, I think I know you well enough, you're smart enough to understand the very complicated set of problems but you decide to simplify it into "evil white men" anyway. You'll offer lengthy paragraphs about the issues which sound really good until the inevitable narrative re-write of these complicated issues into identity politics orientated around the all-important all-encompassing gender and race categories. This time I even agree with you on the lengthy issues and I'm bored of arguing against identity politics so let's skip this round.

I'm done with him now but I found it to be really funny at the time. It's all for entertainment anyway, I visit the forums until I've had enough of it and then I take a break.

It's cute how those who are not regularly murdered everyday on the basis of their skin color get to explain how skin color does not matter. — StreetlightX

I understand, sir, whatever happened to me, I deserved it for being too shallow to understand it and a over privieleged white fuck with a useless degree from a shithole called oxford, so a series of assaults, 4 robberies, shooting my cat, and vandalizing my car is obviously what I deserved for that.

I tiried raising this in a separate thread, but I would say we face a far worse problem.

I started on this in an attempt to understand why the Minneapolis city council wants to disband the police. It must know hundreds more black people will be murdered without police intervention to stop it, as In Baltimore after the Freddie Gray case. So why is it in favor of disbanding the police?

While it took a long time to figure out, it transpires Derek Chauvin is unlikely to be convicted of murder at all, let alone 2nd degree, because Floyd did not inform the police he was high on fentanyl and meth at the time he was arrested. This drug combination is frequently lethal by itself, and in Floyd's case, the drugs aggravated two existing but untreated conditions: arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease. It was quite difficult to find this information, partly because no mainstream media has reported that the autopsy had even been done, and I found out about it deep on forum comments about Minneapolis closing its police dept down:

https://heavy.com/news/2020/05/george-floyd-cause-of-death-autopsy

The prosecutor will have a hard time proving intent to kill, considering Floyd's unknown condition.

Additionally, it transpires Floyd also had a substantial criminal history, with eight arrests, five times in jail, the last time for holding a gun to a woman's stomach while his friends plundered her house, after which, he turned his friends in for a plea bargain to reduce his prison sentence to five years. This information was almost impossible to find, as no US paper has reported it at all. The Daily Mail provided photos of all the records, remarking that the police wouldn't have known about it. However, that's not true, if they had his ID, which I don't actually know is true, then the police have been able to look up all records about any person from their squad cars for some time, as I learned in 2018 when they offered me to join a federal protection program while they nailed some murderers in a black gang just after they also tried to murder me. The Floyd criminal history was published in the UK here:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8366533/George-Floyd-moved-Minneapolis-start-new-life-released-prison-Texas.html?fbclid=IwAR3Trprcp17WZ_qSiieFB2tfDWCYOL5jCFXDS0LoqNtIX_MLV1810JigOKE

With his existing known medical condition while on lethal drugs, with such a long rap sheet, the jury won't be able to find Chauvin guilty beyond doubt.

Unless Chauvin pleads guilty, or the autopsy is shown to be flawed, the riots and lootings are now likely to get even worse, just as after the acquittal of the police arresting Rodney King in Los Angeles, 2012. Disbanding the police seems to me a last-ditch effort to circumvent complete and total annihilation, at this point, but maybe you think the rioting is over.

That's not what Black Lives Matter says. It has made clear, ONE more instance would be enough to trigger complete destruction of the entire nation, which no one could claim is not a terrorist threat. Also, Black Lives Matter has been particularly disinterested in protecting the lives of blacks who will be murdered, at the rate of about one a day for two years, without police intervention to stop it in Minneapolis. I regret to say, given what it has said and done these last few weeks, whatever it was in the past, it is now no more than a terrorist organization that really could not care who dies at all, black or not.

Which is rather moot if you do remember what the Rodney King riots were like, and one can see some folks with itchy fingers in the shadows of Macy's across the country, just hoping THAT happens at a national level.

With his existing known medical condition while on lethal drugs, with such a long rap sheet, the jury won't be able to find Chauvin guilty beyond doubt. — ernestm

Neither preexisting conditions nor a long rap sheet make kneeling on someone's throat for 8 Minutes any less intentional or any less deadly.

So far I have not seen any police statement to that effect at all, only that they are trained to do it, and they have been considering stopping the training. Whatever you believe, your opinion is not what runs a court of law. Facts do, whether you like them or not, and that is why your attitude is the type of problem that will manifest as complete and total devastation as threatened, at least so far

I didnt ask you. I actually think your a fucking liar, if you’ll remember. Ive got nothing to say to you.

Fair enough.

Thats not what Black Lives Matter says. It has made clear, ONE more instance would be enough to trigger complete destructoin of the entire nation. On the other hand, Black Lives Matter has been particularly disintrested in protecting the lives of blacks who will be murdered, at the rate of about one a day for two years, without police intervention to stop it, and I regret to say, given what it has said and done, it appears to me to be a terrorist organization now that really could not care that much who dies, black or not. — ernestm

This is difficult, and I urge you to caution. It was before my time that Britain declared war on Germany and plunged the world into a conflagration that cost millions of lives, mainly on the basis that "Jewish lives matter." I don't want to say that Churchill was a terrorist, or did not care about the lives to be lost. Did the war save Jewish lives or cost Jewish lives? I don't think it is knowable; we only have the war happening, not the alternative. Not to mention all the other lives.

But that is not the calculation that should be made even if it could be made. Ask first what is right. Consequentialism fails because consequences are both infinite and unknowable. So I resort to principles and virtues- truth, fairness, and if the police are corrupt and there is no justice then no life has much value. Putting up with that to stay safe-ish is not morality, but expediency.

It is a judgement whether or not to disband a police force. I would hope that some other policing arrangement would be made, and it could be that reform could be managed without disbanding, I cannot judge from here. But at least allow that those protesting are not trying to kill black people or promote anarchy but to make a safer fairer place for everyone, even if there is a high price to be paid.

It's extremist quotes like this that just don't reflect reality and ignore the fact that more whites have been killed by cops,(which means that if one black is murdered everyday, then two whites are murdered everyday), — Harry Hindu

I've addressed this point multiple times in this thread. If you lack the literacy or the ability to understand those points, then I've nothing more to add.

I understand, sir, whatever happened to me, I deserved it for being too shallow to understand it and a over privieleged white fuck with a useless degree from a shithole called oxford, so a series of assaults, 4 robberies, shooting my cat, and vandalizing my car is obviously what I deserved for that. — ernestm

Get over yourself. I tired to give you a fair shake in your thread, which you all but ignored. At this point you're just a bitter bloviator who is, by your admission, uninterested in discussion.

Get over yourself. I tired to give you a fair shake in your thread, which you all but ignored. At this point you're just a bitter bloviator who is, by your admission, uninterested in discussion. — StreetlightX

If you dont find the Sapir whorf hypothesis worthy of your attention, thats not my problem, and certainly does not mean I am disinterested in discussion. I merely know my limits, that I am an over privieleged white animal with a useless education from oxford who is too shallow to understand anything, thats all

This is difficult, and I urge you to caution. It was before my time that Britain declared war on Germany and plunged the world into a conflagration that cost millions of lives, mainly on the basis that "Jewish lives matter."

No, it was because the Nazis invaded Poland.

I merely know my limits, that I am an over privieleged white animal with a useless education from oxford who is too shallow to understand anything, thats all — ernestm

Funny how the only one playing the victim card in this discussion is - would you look at that - a 'white animal'.

As for systemic racism, I think I know you well enough, you're smart enough to understand the very complicated set of problems but you decide to simplify it into "evil white men" anyway — Judaka

Your words, not mine.

I have no anxieties about describing demographic features of the wealth and power distribution when it fits and is well evidenced. If you need this to feel comfortable: it is not the fault of "individual white men" or "the white race" or whatever and "white people are not inherently evil".

This time I even agree with you on the lengthy issues and I'm bored of arguing against identity politics so let's skip this round — Judaka

How I see it is ultimately in terms of class. Historically white supremacy is a vouchsafing for imperialist expansion, modern day gigantic wealth+resource transfers out of the political south, a justification narrative for the disempowerment of racialised subjects in the imperial home territories through economic-political exclusion and the colonies through apartheid + puppet statecraft. There is also a media climate that allows it to grow as an ideology; literal outright Nazis (just one form of white supremacy) get invited on the news and Muslims are branded as not just terrorists but a threat to "Western" values. It pays to strategically cultivate white supremacy; an ideological vector of indifference towards the working class that part of the working class will enthusiastically buy into because they're pissed off (from their living conditions), badly educated and media illiterate, or given a genuine economic incentive to (oy you Londoner, good job here, just beat the shit out of strikers and victimise the poor, you'll even get to wear a silly hat!). Divide and rule.

The economic gains of slavery and imperialism were left to "trickle down", effecting very many very little in the home countries, until redistributive measures (like nationalising industries, ensuring very high employment within them, welfare, subsidised education and high progressive taxes) split the blood money slightly more equitably in the home territory because no one wants their reserve army of labourers getting uppity on their doorstep, it's bad for business.

We can both agree that "identity politics" isn't critical enough, I just think it's a start; if you start to question the social construction of identity and its relationship with economics, you start to look into how that works too.

Ultimately; if you're pissed off with how the economic conditions are rigged, support those who the conditions are rigged against as effectively as you can; you share resonant economic and political interests with them as they're in the same boat as you - they face more extreme forms of the same thing and acts of outright, personal racism.