Milwaukee Riots

[uke2se]

Did you read the "about" page for your source? Just curious.

I sense an opportunity for some education here. So, in that spirit, here's a link to significant racial discrimination cases by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. These are the folks we pay to try and keep discrimination out of the workforce. This listing doesn't include discrimination by sex or disability - just race/color. Further, it only lists significant cases in the area of employment. Not housing or many other categories. It also doesn't list the day-to-day slights or insults.

Check it out and see if you still agree racism isn't an issue "today."

https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/caselist.cfm

ETA: I didn't go through every case listed, but if you find one where a white person is the target, that would help support your contention about the racism you see against white people.

Noz, you still haven't addressed the evidence posted in this thread.

Just a heads up. You ducking the evidence hasn't gone unnoticed.

 

[N0z]

Noz, you still haven't addressed the evidence posted in this thread.

Just a heads up. You ducking the evidence hasn't gone unnoticed.

I see a lot of "ducking" going on, not just in this thread. Always someone else to blame, except the source.

 

[marplots]

I see a lot of "ducking" going on, not just in this thread. Always someone else to blame, except the source.

It's even worse than that. To make your case you need to connect melanin production to a set of unwanted behaviors. This is quite difficult to do in a convincing fashion. My argumentative burden is much less. All I have to do is a variation of "prove it." I don't have to blame something else, and frankly, I don't have a specific answer. If pressed, I think I'd doubt the existence of some grand general answer at all and put it down to individual choices without an overarching theme.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

It's even worse than that. To make your case you need to connect melanin production to a set of unwanted behaviors. This is quite difficult to do in a convincing fashion. My argumentative burden is much less. All I have to do is a variation of "prove it." I don't have to blame something else, and frankly, I don't have a specific answer. If pressed, I think I'd doubt the existence of some grand general answer at all and put it down to individual choices without an overarching theme.

Are you actually under the impression that melanin production is the only difference between blacks and whites?

There are differences in skeletal structure facial structure, hair structure, musculature, brain structure and size as well as amount of wrinkling on the brain surface, hormone levels, disease susceptibility, gestation period, twinning rate, life span, onset of puberty, development of motor skills as infants, etc.

Plenty more.

We are talking about two sub-species separated by vastly different environments and 50,000 years apart with almost zero contact during that long stretch of time. Quite possibly absolute zero.

Plus, whites have a not-insignificant amount of admixture from an entirely different sub-species which has at times been classified even as a different species, the Neanderthals. Many important traits related to disease resistance and many defining aesthetic traits seem to have originated from this extinct group.

So, if one genome has lots of admixture from another species or sub-species, and one does not... I don't think it can be reasonably claimed that these two sub-species are indistinguishable.

Also, you might be curious to glance at this:

Do pigmentation and the melanocortin system modulate aggression and sexuality in humans as they do in other animals?

"Abstract
Pigmentation of the hair, skin, cuticle, feather and eye is one of the most salient and variable attributes of vertebrates. In many species, melanin-based coloration is found to be pleiotropically linked to behavior. We review animal studies that have found darker pigmented individuals average higher amounts of aggression and sexual activity than lighter pigmented individuals. We hypothesize that similar relationships between pigmentation, aggression, and sexuality occur in humans. We first review the literature on non-human animals and then review some of the correlates of melanin in people, including aggression and sexual activity. Both within human populations (e.g., siblings), and between populations (e.g., races, nations, states), studies find that darker pigmented people average higher levels of aggression and sexual activity (and also lower IQ). We conceptualize skin color as a multigenerational adaptation to differences in climate over the last 70,000 years as a result of “cold winters theory” and the “Out-of-Africa” model of human origins. We propose life history theory to explain the covariation found between human (and non-human) pigmentation and variables such as birth rate, infant mortality, longevity, rate of HIV/AIDS, and violent crime."

 

[Megalodon]

Obviously melanin makes you more agressive. That's why africans invaded the whole world, perpetrating genocide after genocide, enslaving other human beings and literally destroying whole civilizations...

 

[marplots]

Are you actually under the impression that melanin production is the only difference between blacks and whites?

It is the discriminator I hear used, so it's the one I addressed.

There are differences in skeletal structure facial structure, hair structure, musculature, brain structure and size as well as amount of wrinkling on the brain surface, hormone levels, disease susceptibility, gestation period, twinning rate, life span, onset of puberty, development of motor skills as infants, etc.

Plenty more.

The problem is that skin color is being used as a proxy. I never hear claims about onset of puberty when it comes to social policy. The idea is that skin color is indicative of something important, beyond resistance to sunburn. We could do the same with other physical attributes if we wanted to - associate ear lobe size to whatever the data dredges up.

The question is to what extent drawing out a perceptible phenotypic difference predicts other attributes of interest. You could, for example, say that darker skin makes people more susceptible to vitamin D deficiency by drawing a link between melanin, absorption of sunlight and conversion of vitamin D precursors. But even that statement would have to be qualified by environment, since it happens preferentially in northern latitudes.

We are talking about two sub-species separated by vastly different environments and 50,000 years apart with almost zero contact during that long stretch of time. Quite possibly absolute zero.

And in one generation of interbreeding, all that evaporates. I simply cannot tell the ancestry of a person in any detail by observing their skin tone.

So, if one genome has lots of admixture from another species or sub-species, and one does not... I don't think it can be reasonably claimed that these two sub-species are indistinguishable.

They may be distinguishable on a genetic basis. But we aren't doing genetics directly, we are using skin color as a proxy. That's poor science, if it's science at all.

It's easy enough to see. Suppose I described someone who was male, poor, violent, a gang member, and who had been in prison for selling drugs. Could you tell what their skin color was with any reliability?

How about if I told you whether that person grew up in Detroit or the mountains of West Virginia?

 

[smartcooky]

I've literally heard interviews of black people protesting police shootings where they admit they have no idea what happened nor whether anything wrong was actually done but that they are protesting anyway because they don't have faith in the system.

There are some hard truths in this country that neither side wants to admit.

One side refuses to admit that black people still face systemic discrimination that disadvantages them in numerous ways.

The other side refuses to admit that the current black culture has a problem and disadvantages them in numerous ways. Whether intentional or not many have internalized the role of the poor black man who can't get anywhere not because they don't put forth the effort but because everybody be keeping the black man down. You see this same behavior in white people who don't put forth the effort except they blame immigrants.

The older I get, the more I realize that both sides often have some truth to what they say but neither side wants to see the others truth nor their own self deception.

Well said!! Give this person a cigar!!

 

[smartcooky]

Suppose I described someone who was male, poor, violent, a gang member, and who had been in prison for selling drugs. Could you tell what their skin color was with any reliability?

Assuming that we are talking about the USA here, then without any other information, I could tell you that, statistically, this person is only slightly more likely to be black than white.... 40% v 39%.

Source: http://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/rates.html

However, if we reverse the question, and ask if any given black person has been in jail, then we get a different answer. Statistically, any given black person is over five times more likely to have done jail time than any given white person..... 2306/100K v 450/100K

These are not my opinions, they are facts, and facts are stubborn.; you can't wish them away or ignore them. No amount of creative, apologist, politically correct spin-doctoring can avoid the cold, hard fact that blacks are hugely over-represented in crime statistics.

Why that is the case is a different argument!

What can be done to address this situation is the centre of considerable debate, but IMO, trying simply to fix it from the outside is not the solution.

 

[PhantomWolf]

!= is early internet slang for not equals, from the SQL and JavaScript operator that used to be commonly used in Boolean searches, archive tags etc.

Actually it was the from the "Not Equal To" operator for C, which the likes of JavaScript were based on. I did check BCLP (or B, the C precursor language) but it doesn't appear to have the a syntax for "Not Equal Too".