My Grand Unifed Theory of Racism

[garbon]

Yeah.

I don't personally think there's a big problem with "where are you from?" Asking it 9 times on the other hand.

Though I certainly have found myself in a situation where a black guy freaked out for just being asked it once

I wonder whether it's a more sensitive question in other countries.
Britain is a place where you expect to find diversity. When you run into a Chinese Norwegian though... Then damn it I'm curious. Which likely annoys the Chinese Norwegian as he is getting it all the time.

Part of maturing from a child to adult is self control. We don't have to engage in every whim.

[The Minsky Moment]

Of course, Nigel Farage just doesn't get invited to the palace

I imagine not, but he does have the suspiciously non-John Bullish last name.

[garbon]

IMO there are steps individuals can take to manage risks in an injust world. It is often sensible to take those steps on an individual and case-by-case basis. At the same time, those risk mitigation steps often carry a cost one way or the other.

At the same time, it is IMO incumbent upon decent folks to try to make our world less injust or, at the very least, to not actively perpetuate and promote injustice.

Again IMO, very often "well meaning" advice on how to mitigate risk is used as a substitute for actual action against injust situations, as an excuse for not taking action, or even as a tactic to shift responsibility for the injustice of the world unto its various victims for failing to meet some conveniently arbitrary standard of "sensible" risk mitigation.

Don't members of minority groups already take steps to mitigate risk?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_talk_(racism_in_the_United_States)

[Jacob]

Don't members of minority groups already take steps to mitigate risk?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_talk_(racism_in_the_United_States)

Yup. But - and I believe you agree with this - there's more to countering racism than "members of minority groups should take steps to mitigate racism; if bad things happens it's their fault for being insufficiently cautious in their risk mitigation strategies."

[The Brain]

I think it's dangerous to focus completely on minority groups. Historically racism against the majority has been a huge problem, and I don't think we're out the woods yet.

[viper37]

If risk factor profiling is based on skin color, it is inherently flawed.  It's a false variable to begin with. And it leads to false stats because then you arrest more people based on their skin color so you feed the system false data.

It's like saying most Asians are smart and most Blacks are stupid based on university admission rates.  It's a flawed metric.  And then, if you were to base your university admission criteria on this, you would increase the flawed model by using flawed date to begin with.

I see your point about the feedback loop, but I don't see any evidence for the assertion that race in a vacuum is not a predictive variable.

I do not see any evidence for the assertion that race in a vaccum is a predictive variable of any crime.

[Jacob]

I think it's dangerous to focus completely on minority groups. Historically racism against the majority has been a huge problem, and I don't think we're out the woods yet.

Do you have any examples you can share?

[The Brain]

I think it's dangerous to focus completely on minority groups. Historically racism against the majority has been a huge problem, and I don't think we're out the woods yet.

Do you have any examples you can share?

Apartheid South Africa, Qing China, many parts of the world in the colonial era.

[viper37]

Yi, since we were talking about racial profiling, here's an interesting case.

Terrebonne police, city slammed with $205K lawsuit for systemic discrimination

1) How is he dressed like a gangster?
2) How do cops determine his clothing make him suspicious while he's driving his car?
3) How is it a justified use of human resources to stop people like him twice a day?
4) Given the likelyhood that at some point the victims of racial profiling will fight back in court when they are innocent, how can we justify the cost of legal expenses incurred?


I'm not saying it has no use at all when they stop real, known, criminals for a random check.  But arresting ordinary citizens and fining them is a step beyond decency I'm not willing to take.

[Admiral Yi]

The police operate in a different legal framework than store security.  The police by law need probable cause to arrest and something like reasonable suspicion to detain and question.

AFAIK store security don't have the same legal burden to watch one customer more closely than others.

[viper37]

The police operate in a different legal framework than store security.  The police by law need probable cause to arrest and something like reasonable suspicion to detain and question.

AFAIK store security don't have the same legal burden to watch one customer more closely than others.

But we were having a dicussion on a grand unified theory of racism.  It goes beying store security.

[Admiral Yi]

But we were having a dicussion on a grand unified theory of racism.  It goes beying store security.

That's where I've been willing to take it.  If you want to push the envelope bring up up a different case.

[Barrister]

The police operate in a different legal framework than store security.  The police by law need probable cause to arrest and something like reasonable suspicion to detain and question.

AFAIK store security don't have the same legal burden to watch one customer more closely than others.

Police need grounds to detain someone, but can question any damn person they like, with or without any reason in the world.  You don't like it you're free to walk away - but of course many don't realize that. 

They can also surveil any damn person they like.

[Jacob]

Police need grounds to detain someone, but can question any damn person they like, with or without any reason in the world.  You don't like it you're free to walk away - but of course many don't realize that. 

... and, of course, in jurisdictions where police have the ability - legally or illegally - to severely inconvenience people on arbitrary grounds, you are not free to walk away in practice.

[viper37]

Police need grounds to detain someone, but can question any damn person they like, with or without any reason in the world.  You don't like it you're free to walk away - but of course many don't realize that. 

... and, of course, in jurisdictions where police have the ability - legally or illegally - to severely inconvenience people on arbitrary grounds, you are not free to walk away in practice.

Russian police let your fly away.