Interesting.

Can you slip a matchbook cover between the two?

In general, I think, racism is used to describe acts of discrimination that serve to maintain the privilege and dominance of an ethnic group, rather than those carried out by a group that lacks a position of power. From that I can only conclude that Tippit considers him/herself to be a member of a group that lacks power and privilege, and that therefore this lacks the power imbalance aspect that nowadays is commonly required in the definition of racism. I think it would be illuminating to find out whether that's the case, and if so, which underprivileged ethnic group Tippit perceives him/herself as a member of.

Dave

My guess was that he was using semantics to make the claim that he wasn't a 'real' racist, just a garden variety bigot.

Still a distinction without a great deal of difference, but I guess if it makes him feel better then it's okay.

I think he's saying that he's prejudiced against people who do "X", rather than prejudiced against X-people.

I think the important thing here is that we give people who say things like “This seems to be a recurring theme among black people” every possible benefit of the doubt.

After all, it would be unseemly to make judgements about someone who is in the process of making judgements about an entire ethnic group.

What comes through for me is the upside-down logic of racism. Of course, if racial discrimination occurs in the form of police unfairly targeting black people and abusing them, then the corresponding confusion, reaction, indignation and (yes, even) irrational response that occurs in the face of racial discrimination will be prevalent among the black people so targeted.

Tippit would like to think he is not victim blaming, and maybe in his heart he is not, but it's an inevitable result if the victimization is what causes the behavior. It ends up being pretty much the same old same old, that it is unseemly for the victims of bias to behave as if they should not be.

Sure. That's the customary understanding when someone uses the word "prejudiced".

It's one of those irregular nouns. "I take note of demographics, you are prejudiced, he is a racist."

Dave

Certainly. I would characterize racists as hating people for some immutable thing that they cannot control, and having the ability to materially affect people's lives as a direct result, which is unfair.

I, on the other hand, recognize patterns in certain types of people (not at all limited to race). Besides cultural patterns which are easy to recognize, if you're honest, there are others. For instance, while I am not prejudiced towards all black people, I do avoid almost everyone I meet who has face tattoos. Most people who have face tattoos, in my experience, are either violent, or attempting to signal to others how violent they are. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I'm not really interested in finding out who they are. Perhaps I'm a bigot for avoiding people with face tattoos. It doesn't really matter. I will continue to do so as long as its prudent.

I accept the signals that other people send me at face value, and many of them, are not constructive.

It's not so much a judgement, as an observation. Part of abstract thought, is the ability to form rules and hypotheses from data and observation. I'm not condemning black people as a group, but they almost always choose to identify primarily as being "with a group", so I indulge them. I also acknowledge that the media has a role in how people, and groups of people are portrayed, which seems to be a big part of the problem these days.

I'm sure there are plenty of black and white people alike who react rationally to police violence and threats, they just don't show up on youtube or the news very much.

Ah yet another "I'm not racist I just expect black people to be able to deal with hundreds of years of ingrained prejudice and massive systematic racism with 100%" types.

I think there is actual racism in policework, and in the judicial system at large. I do not, however, believe that systemic racism (racism everywhere, all the time) exists, or even close to exists. I think there are other root causes for the social unrest that is going on.

I also support police reform. Even radical police reform, but probably not so far as defunding. De-militarizing them, and holding them personally accountable for the crimes they commit would be a good start.

I'm definitely not victim-blaming. How could those two men possibly be blamed for that cop pulling a gun on them as they walked out of the building? I am commenting on the fact that it's very unwise to react the way they did.

That’s a bunch of racist horse****.

Not a judgement, just an observation.

No, it's not. It has 13.7 fatalities per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (2018). More than "Mining machine operators" (11.0) but less than "Grounds maintenance workers" (18.6), "Farmers" (24.7), "Roofers" (51.5), "Fishers" (77.4), and "Logging workers" (97.6).

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...is-police-work

And they can quit. Noone is forcing them to work as police officers. Maybe they would like to try farming instead?

Considering that the source you cite gives the average fatality rate as 3.5 per 100k amongst the American workforce, I'm not sure your statistic is implying what you imagine it's implying (nearly 4x the national average). Depending on what arbitrary threshold you set as "dangerous".

I live in an area where there's a lot of farming, and I'm not aware of any incidents where farm workers have accidentally shot tractors because they feared for their lives.

Dave

So (rule of) what you're saying is that farm workers need to be given funding to buy weapons capable of taking out tractors.

And intensive courses on tractology.

Dave

My point was that police work is not as dangerous as some would have it. Is it more dangerous than many other professions? Yes. Is it so dangerous that it warrants shooting people with impunity? No, absolutely not. It's about half as dangerous as being a farmer.

Fun related fact: There are around 2.1 million farms in the US. There are around 800,000 police officers.

It's more dangerous to deliver pizza. The Thin Bread Crust Line is the only flag I salute.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...61/511/db9.jpg

Metal Gear Solid Alert sound

It's not just black people, and the group most likely to be harmed per person are Native Americans.

I'll add another thing - when MLK Jr. practiced nonviolence back in the day, he wasn't actually practicing nonviolence. Rather , he knew that the concept of Jim Crow in the minds of the average white American - the thought of happy Negros who loved their white benefactors - was a lie. Nowadays, far too many people - and your quote is a perfect example - have chosen instead to embrace racial violence. If too many people embrace this, then MLK Jr's plan will no longer work.

Wanna know why I don't sob when I hear about riots hitting major retailers, or police stations? It's posts like yours. "I mean, you blacks always wanna argue instead of doing exactly what the police have in mind when they're panicking and waving guns - never mind whether or not each cop on the scene has something entirely different in mind. Why haven't you developed superpowers yet like in Marvel movies?" If cops embrace random violence, don't act shocked when the community violently casts them out.

(And why haven't I embraced it? Because I don't see it as a sustainable idea. But as much as you want to talk slick about black people, the truth is that the American white community is going to continue to see violent fits until they get their act together and push for sustained change. And that's not every white person - but it very clearly means a majority of US white men at the very least - who are fully ready to either sit on their hands, or vote for a protofascist who is currently running concentration camps for brown people.)

Ah, you mean like Levar Jones. Or Philando Castile. Or Charles Kinsey. And never mind that cops are the ones introducing the weapons into situations like these, and are doing so voluntarily.

When BLM started, I asked a simple question: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do? And in all these years, no member of our White Supremacy Squad has even tried to answer it - and it's because they knew that in the end, there simply was no answer at all. When these angry, terrified, well-armed white supremacist goons decide they're going to ruin a black person's life, that's it. And yes, you are directly saying that this is fine, like a cartoon dog in a burning building.

Wanna know why Eric Garner was yelling about how the police were constantly harassing him for nothing right before a cop choked him out? It's because the police were constantly harassing him for nothing - including on that day when a lieutenant saw him just being black and outside, and got angry and demanded that he be removed.

And that's exactly the problem. He can be as scared as he wants - he's not cornered, he's the aggressor. He's free to leave, turn in his badge, and find another line of work. There are plenty of lines of work that I'm unsuited for as well, there's no shame in saying "This looks like a job for someone else".

You are clearly defending his actions, regardless of what you may want.

I am pro-police reform. I dislike police. I dislike what they (and legislators) are doing to our civil liberties. I dislike how they throw non-violent drug users/dealers in jail. Police have done nothing to ever help me, and all they have ever done is harass me, or tax me with fines and tickets. As far as protecting me, they won't. In a home invasion when seconds count, police are only minutes away. I rely on being heavily armed to protect myself. Police are around to tag the deceased and fill out reports. Police work IS dangerous, and I agree it is not near the most dangerous jobs. If you read my previous posts, I think policework should be made MORE dangerous, by holding them accountable for their shoot first, get off unaccountable rules of engagement that are putting the general public at great risk.

I don't, however, think this is racism issue, but a police brutality issue.

Your dichotomy couldn't be more false.

why can't it be both?

cops acting violently in the assumption that there won't be any legal repercussions to do so.
Conviction rates suggests that this is more true if the victim belongs to a minority than if they are white.

Really? Tell that to Daniel Shaver, and Tony Timpa. Shall we say their names?

Feel free to join BLM protestors in doing so. Might want to buy a TARDIS though, or perhaps a Delorean, since you're years late.

I find it remarkable how anti-BLM folks only bring up cases of police killing nonviolent white people when it's time to distract from the systemic bias in the US criminal justice system though. When these incidents actually happen, it's crickets. But some folks see black people rallying against racism and all of a sudden it's "But what about Daniel Shaver?"

Well? What about him? Black folks have been saying that this impacts white people as well. Where've you been?

It's not rocket science. Many violent racists don't *just* hate blacks. They'd also attack any whites that offends them - it's just that when they come across whites, merely existing isn't one of the reasons.

Yup - indeed even in this thread by multiple people. Including you.

First of all, "black lives matter" is two separate things. One is a universal truth, and the other is a political organization with a Marxist agenda, that is openly anti-family. I don't oppose Black Lives Matter because they want police reform, I oppose them because they're trying to overturn the United States of America in a communist color revolution, funded by elites like Soros, et al.

Second, I don't believe systemic racism exists. The recent civil unrest isn't about the death of George Floyd, it's because of a combination of the fact that people are broke and desperate, partly due to Covid, and mostly due to the Federal Reserve System causing massive wealth disparity by subsidizing asset holders at the great expense of savers and workers, a concept that barely 0.000001% of the population understands. The polarizing media is also party to whipping people up into a frenzy, and deflecting the blame which should squarely be placed upon financial elites on "racist white people" instead.

Third, white people are killed by police at almost 2:1, and black males, which make up roughly 6% of the US population are responsible for about 50% of homicides!

The murder of George Floyd was just a catalyst for a color revolution sponsored by elites (all of the banks and corporations are on the side of Black Lives Matter, despite their open and avowed Marxism and communist revolutionary agenda).

The fact that I can sit here and post non-stop about how negatively I feel about the nascent police state, and yet, I'm still viewed as the enemy, is strong evidence for how successful this propaganda has been, and how utterly divided and polarized we are. I want police reform, but not at the cost of overthrowing the US in a communist revolution, and I will resist violently if the BLM agenda progresses towards this, or if BLM shows up in my neighborhood, setting fires and causing chaos.

Nope. https://www.politifact.com/article/2...xist-movement/

Yep. It's well documented that all of the founders of BLM are communists, with communist propaganda and an open agenda to "disrupt" the nuclear family. They actually removed the part about disrupting the family from their website very recently, but I saw it for myself. I agree that the vast majority of BLM supporters are not communists, and want police and judicial reforms, but the problem is that the banks and corporations are funding the founders and the political organization itself.

This is a communist color revolution which is attempting to cloak itself in a civil rights movement, by which any criticism can simply be dismissed as racism, and Americans are seeing through it.

Anyone who wants real police reform and real justice had better call this out, or there will probably be a civil war.

I like how in your conspiracy theory you allege that our corporate overlords are in league with Marxist revolutionaries attempting to overthrow them.

Now, I don’t expect internal logical consistency in a conspiracy theory, but come on... you’re not even trying.

Good thing for you that ol' "Tail-gunner Joe" is dead, or he'd be suing you for plagiarism.

Didn't you get the memo? Red-baiting is chump level populism, except for the True Believers™. And that's just preaching to the choir anyway.

I'm sure sad that a 76% white country is in danger of being overthrown by a medley of variously-colored commie bandar-log without the law who don't much like each other and who don't agree on anything any more than The Wight Men do with each other.

But heavily armed Wide Men down in Florida will keep us safe. And healthy with zinc & vitamin see.

That's correct. Communism has always been a movement of banking elites looking to consolidate economic power, and through the power of fiat money and fractional reserve banking they have come to own and control the corporations that dominate us.

It's entirely consistent. You're just ignorant of history. What cannot be denied, is the banking and corporate support of communist BLM. So ask yourself, why?

Most of BLM are white liberal snowflake ANTIFA freaks, not that race has anything to do with communism vs. freedom. But it's a communist tactic to paint their opponents as bigots. If you support ANTIFA in a color revolution, who is going to keep you safe from us?

Or...

Most of the rioters are white people (it's a recurring theme among white people - sports teams play, pumpkins are set out, and they start getting violent), who want to support but lack direction (seriously, where are the white fathers? These kids are just running wild.) but most of the actual discussion, the rallies, and so on, are primarily local black people, not just holding protests, but holding voting drives and the like as well.

72% of the US population is white. 13% is black. That's a ratio of roughly 6:1. You don't find it problematic that blacks are 3 times as likely to be killed by police than whites?

Also "color revolution"? Dude, your racism is showing and your "I'm not racist" tirades aren't helping.

Conspiracy forum os over there >

I find it problematic that blacks commit most of the crimes, and especially the most homicides, and that guarantees more negative interaction from police. Whether or not the response has been fair and proportionate is debatable.

Your abject ignorance is showing, if you think “color revolution” is a racial slur. And, I’m well past worrying about whether anyone is falsely accusing me and half the population of being racist. I don’t care anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No need to care.
"Racist" has been determined to have so little actual meaning that it cannot even be cited as defamation.

https://www.vondranlegal.com/can-cal...famation-claim

from link:

(“the allegation that a person is a ‘racist' . . . is not actionable because the term ‘racist' has no factually-verifiable meaning”); Edelman v. Croonquist, 2010 WL 1816180, at *6 (D.N.J. May 4, 2010)