cb18

I ignored all the stuff where you went off the rails and started making wacky accusations, or whatever, it wasn't particularly clear...

My only mention of blacks was in showing how the talking point of "arrested more often for the same crimes(drug possession)" doesn't hold up to scrutiny when you consider how often those drug crimes are occurring in combination with other more serious crimes. In that case it is perfectly reasonable to talk in aggregate, since that is what you were doing in relaying that faulty stat.

that does not in any way say that individuals are not being judged and incurring negative opportunities because of their being black.

Whether that is occurring and to what degree cannot be said. Even if it could, what do you want to do about it? You can't just re-education camp everyone until they meet your standards.

Human nature doesn't work that way. But maybe you can take solace in knowing that biases may present themselves not just about racial groups. Saturday night drivers may be judged differently than other days, men may be judged more suspiciously around small children than women, investments more likely to return money may be judged as more favorable places to put money.

This is clearly a personal issue for you. I think we agree that we both want the best for all people.

My feeling is that for a harmonious society with integrity, we need to ascribe to phenomena, causes for which there is clear evidence for a causal relationship.

If you want to ascribe "institutional racism" as the cause to certain phenomena, but the observation can be made that those same phenomena exist in environments without the institutions you are blaming, Mexican performance in Mexico vs the USA for example, then the "institutional racism" theory doesn't hold water.

But even without that avenue to negate, you would still need significant evidence to validate the "institutional racism" theory. You can't just say, "I've observed Phenomenon B, and I've theorized Cause A, so A must cause B."

Decrying "institutional racism" as this kind of ambiguous, universal menace doesn't help anybody. First you would need clear evidence of it. Then it wouldn't be ambiguous, then you could solve the problem. You can't solve ambiguous problems, they need to be specific.

If you can't even lay out clear unambiguous evidence for the problem you are trying solve, then how will you know when it is solved? What are you fighting for?

Ha! No one else has even evidenced reading the post, I applaud you for seeming to have at least read it.

so they've had much less time to be dragged down by systemic racism.

They're not being "dragged down" at all, they're being "pushed up." There is no reason to think that given enough time they will eventually be dragged down.

There is not some race in the US conspiring to keep other races down given enough time. I'd imagine any race accussed of such a thing would find it highly offensive.

Far be it from me to make the accusation, but there is precedent to say that Asians and Jews are oppressing everyone else in the US because of their greater average income, and because they hold "high prestige" positions in proportionally greater numbers.

There is no evidence for societal wide mechanisms keeping particular races down. People looks at measurements, see differences, then try to blame the measuring stick, i.e. society for the differences.

the fact that they are lighter of skin tone tends to make them a less targeted group by racist actors.

That doesn't even sound like the way people like to imagine "institutional racism." I thought the whole point was that there is no conscious targetting and not anyone particular actor but society as a whole in some fuzzy, unspecified way is to blame.

Who is 'we' and what exactly do 'we see'??? I'm dying to know.

I don't get this tone here.

We is anyone who looks, what we see is similarity in crime rates, test scores, achievement, SES, income, etc. anything people in the US try to ascribe to "institutional racism." Yet we see similar metrics and behavior in countries with different institutional histories, and in the countries where these US minorities originate.

What explains the similarity in crime rates, test scores, achievement, SES, between Africans in the US, England, and Sweden? 2 of the 3 having no history of enslaving Africans.

[0] Races aren't arrested at different rates for the same crimes, race percentage in victim reports match race percentage in arrests.

Drug arrest rate appear to vary as the result of compound charges, i.e. while being arrested for another crime, blacks happen to have drugs on them. Because blacks commit some crimes at a much higher rate than whites the drug numbers look biased without this context.

---

Reread the questions and arguments I posed, then if you want to respond to them, ok, but otherwise don't waste my time.

This can be pretty obviously understood as the result of compound charges, of which the drug charge is a minor component.

Bear with me, facts incoming...

Black people, particularly young black males commit crimes at a much higher rate than other groups. In committing these other crimes and then being arrested, a certain percentage of them happen to have a bag of weed in their pocket, which then gets tacked on as an accessory charge.

Before anyone wants to argue about the objective and carefully tabulated crime rates. No, whites don't just get away with more of the petty, street, and violent crime we are discussing, race ratios of victim reports match those of arrests.

women tend to make significantly less money for doing the same work, in the same positions, at the same company, because of (largely) subconscious biases.

No, because of intentionally faulty statistics to calculate such things.

The gender wage gap uses bogus statistics - Christina Hoff Sommers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58arQIr882w

https://www.google.com/search?q=milo+wage+gap

If women are doing the same work as men and accepting significantly lower pay to do so, why aren't companies tripping over themselves in trying to hire all women staffs and significantly reduce costs?

diversity is important.

"Diversity" in the sense it is used in social policy(for some reason only in the west, no one is harping on Japan, or Saudi Arabia, or Angola about diversity) is harmful and destructive to otherwise healthy societies.

We show that ethnic diversity or fractionalization and values diversity are distinct and while the former has a negative effect on innovation, the latter contributes positively. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2015.11...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam#Diversity_and...

Diversity DESTROYS Social Cohesion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTROCGb5qj8

"Diversity is our Strength" ^ watch that

as well as to ensure that you're exposing people to as many new and differing viewpoints as possible (and, in turn, taking those viewpoints seriously)

Actually, historically successful societies have pretty refined heuristics for what to take seriously and it has served them well.

It is absurd to say we should take all viewpoints seriously.

How are you defining 'viewpoint', and 'seriously'?

What does it mean to take seriously the viewpoints common in Islam that --

gay people should be persecuted, to the point of being thrown off buildings, stoned to death, or beheaded?

family members should kill other family members in the name of 'honor'?

murdering non-believers is acceptable?

How seriously do you take these viewpoints?

Were NASA hindered in their mission to get to the moon in the 1960s because it was a bunch of white guys with viewpoints grounded in careful observation, excelling at math and science and a kind of boundary pushing audaciousness that seems quite particular to men of European descent?

The thing is, there is tenuous evidence at best for "institutional racism," and in nowhere near the quantity that would be needed to account for all of its supposed effects. Indeed to the contrary we've had decades of policies seeking parity between between certain segments of society on various measures, and yet the gaps remain virtually unchanged.

There are other exceedingly more plausible explanations for the "achievement gap" and the other divergences. But people in certain segments of polite society have a nasty habit of trying to ruin the lives of anyone who so much as mutters these other explanations.

For the "institutional racism" proponents...

Has anyone attempted to explain why all this "institutional racism" seems to be working to such great benefit for north-east Asians in the US, who consistently rank above the supposed "evil white oppressors" in various socio-economic metrics?

Or why we see common patterns of achievement and behavior between races across societies with wildly different institutional histories?

That's not an accurate characterization.

There is an element of that, but it is frequently pushed back against.

It's mostly people who are dismayed by this recent migrant madness and the resultant massive spike in horrible crimes.

It is ostensibly also just a place for discussion of european culture but attention to the migrant madness, and seeking political solutions for it dominates the conversation because the issue is so heavily censored elsewhere on reddit.

edit: And it's highly likely that the vast majority of occurences of the string 'nazi' in that sub are in the context of satirical postings like, Oh, you think borders should be secure and rapists should be prosecuted? You must be a nazi!

That's a very astute observation.

Anyone have any ideas of other markets(or potential markets) where such an approach could be translated?

So you can cover the cost of their employees while they intentionally run at negative margins, attempting to eliminate competition so they can later charge you monopolistic pricing?

Do you think there is a database that connects an identifying factor of all computers to their owners?

A computer vendor could maybe keep a list of device serial numbers/MAC addresses, along with non-cash payment methods, but how could law enforcement legally acquire such data, if not authorized in a specific case?

And if there is a specific case, what is the likelihood that an investigator could determine a device's serial number/MAC from over the internet(how is that even possible?) and then locate the original vendor then locate the original purchaser?

The crux of this seems to be somehow uniquely identifying a device over the internet. A vendor having a database of items sold + payment method seems more plausible.

Isn't an IP address the only identifying factor of a machine transmitted over the internet? And IP addresses aren't permanently tied to machines. Even if theoretically an IP address could somehow be used to acquire the connected MAC addresses, doesn't TOR prevent that?

I'm not an expert on this, if something is wrong here, or I'm missing something, I'd be happy to learn.

Who are these "non-fringe" you speak of? People who tell you what you want to believe? HuffPo bloggers?

Or are you just blowing hot air, totally ignorant of this field in general, and decided to call some people you've never heard of "fringe"...

very hard to be raised in the same circumstances when you're of different races in the US.

Adopted siblings...

And these differences don't only present themselves in the US.

Also, maybe you missed the black on white numbers which are off the charts compared to the inverse.

Like who? Stephen Jay Gould?

a cursory glance

Maybe you should give it a closer look so you're not resting your worldview on confirmation bias.

This is a false statement: The overwhelming consensus by scientists at reputable top universities don't allege this at all.

That article is just a simple and clear telling of sourced facts that came up when I was searching for some facts.

Why in the world would you think that? We're still made of genes aren't we? We still sexually reproduce don't we?

because of actions we (developed world) have taken

Stark differences existed between the continents long before colonisation. Stark differences exist in areas that were never colonised.

Some areas that were colonised are now thriving.

As much as we like to flatter ourselves, we are not the cause of all the world's problems.

Nor is the constant haranguing of people who have nothing to do with events decades and centuries past of benefit to anybody.

I don't know how this will be received. I don't even know how I feel about it. But someone has to ask the tough questions.

Is it evolutionarily prudent to go about saving people who can't save themselves?

our current solution of "let all the poor people die" is not a good one.

I don't think that is our "current solution," the lives of many of the world's "poor" have gotten immeasurably better, health and material wise, since contact with Europeans.

Prior to outside contact sub-Saharan Africans didn't have the wheel, written language, a calendar, buildings greater than 1-story, any mechanical devices, domesticated animals, ...

Efforts against malaria, and for clean water are ongoing. Iodised salt does wonders. The list goes on... I don't know how you got in your mind your "current solution."

http://www.infowars.com/black-crime-facts-that-the-white-lib...

One must also consider that it isn't the density per se, but the populations. For example, you could compare two equally dense areas but made up of different population groups. You would find a difference.

It's quite likely that those are compound charges, meaning possession is not the only charge, i.e. they are arrested for something else, then found to be in possession.

So they are charged disproportionately because they commit crimes disproportionately,[0] and some of them happen to have a bag in their pocket while doing so.

[0]Aboriginal and black Canadians are grossly overrepresented in Canada’s correctional institutions

http://www.academia.edu/5110524/Race_Crime_and_Criminal_Just...

This paper is itself biased against Ockham's Razor, they hit on some truth here, We cannot discount, however, the probability that increased rates of offending among certain racialized groups contributes to their overrepresentation in correctional statistics. but then spend the whole paper trying to hand wave it away.