|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:34 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Kabrams wrote: |
And I'm not even going to dignify Sergio's comments
with a response. |
Sorry to hear that. I was looking forward to discussing your ideas in the hope that a civil, calm yet frank discussion might take place, since not only are the US states with the highest murder rates also the states with the highest black populations, the phenomenon of black violence seems to be truly international:
International homicide rates:
1. Southern Africa
4. West and Central Africa
5. East Africa
6. Africa
7. Caribbean
11. World average
20. East and South-east Asia
21 (last). West and Central Europe
But the US government would have its police officers arrest people for racist behavior, which must necessarily divert police attention from murderous criminality (which is, ironically, disproprtionately black in perpetration). In what way is this an unreasonable critique? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| Kabrams wrote: |
And I'm not even going to dignify Sergio's comments
with a response. |
Sorry to hear that. I was looking forward to discussing your ideas in the hope that a civil, calm yet frank discussion might take place, since not only are the US states with the highest murder rates also the states with the highest black populations, the phenomenon of black violence seems to be truly international:
International homicide rates:
1. Southern Africa
4. West and Central Africa
5. East Africa
6. Africa
7. Caribbean
11. World average
20. East and South-east Asia
21 (last). West and Central Europe
But the US government would have its police officers arrest people for racist behavior, which must necessarily divert police attention from murderous criminality (which is, ironically, disproprtionately black in perpetration). In what way is this an unreasonable critique? |
Yes because when I think of lily-white countries Mali, Senegal, Niger, Mauritania pop up in my mind. Where were they on the list?
There is also the thought that said violence in the top of the list countries might be due to the lack of resources and leftover damage from 400 years of colonialism (which included race-based slavery) and stripping the countries of resources.
After all when one thinks of violence, death, destruction, warfare, genocide, forced removal of indigenous peoples, chattel slavery, weapons of mass destruction, repeated breaking of treaties, war crimes, fire-bombings of cities, and the like, the LAST people to pop up in my mind are Western Europeans and their ilk.
Is that really the direction you want this conversation to go? The violence of the world and culture/race? Are you seriously trying to suggest that when it comes to violence, the people with the least blood on their hands are Western Europeans?
There's madmen a plenty to go around from Hitler (Occidental) to Stalin (Slavic) to Idi Amin (African) to Pol Pot (Asian) but I mean, come on...
If we should have more cops at work focusing on crime in black neighborhoods, we should flood Western European nations with military police and overseers to prevent that particular brand of violence.
| Quote: |
| feel making a public statement made in jest that offends black people should be marked on one's criminal record, and so forth |
When that kid used the mic he ceased to be a customer and was therefore trespassing (and possibly some sort of public endangerment charge) in the building. So yes, he should have a charge on his record, though as I've said before I'm iffy on the whole 'bias crime' thing due to the unknowns involved in the case, not to mention my ambivalence
towards hate crime legislation.
| Quote: |
| It's clear from this that his comment was made to sound exactly like a normal Wal-Mart announcement, making it, again, a harmless prank. If he had yelled it into the mic in a threatening tone, you would have a point. |
Saying it calmly or not has nothing to do with it. I could say "Alright everyone listen up this will only take a minute" in a calm voice in a bank, and if I did that I most assuredly would be charge with a crime, as well I should be.
That kind of thing is so not something you play around with.
If someone said "Attention Walmart Customers: All white people, leave the store now" I'd be trying to get out of that store ASAP just the same. They could be pranking or it could be the prelude to a bloodbath, either way I'm not sticking around to find out. You can and go ahead and laugh at me as I get out of there and its only a prank.
Then again sometimes it is a good idea to get out of the building even though people say it ain't so bad. See:9/11 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| When that kid used the mic he ceased to be a customer and was therefore trespassing ... |
Trespassing isn't what is being put on his criminal record, so even if there is a law somewhere that says using a microphone located in a customer-accessible area in a store makes one guilty of trespassing, it's not particularly salient to the discussion at hand.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| ... (and possibly some sort of public endangerment charge) in the building. |
No one was in any real danger as a result of this. And public endangerment is also not the charge that's being put on his record.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| If someone said "Attention Walmart Customers: All white people, leave the store now" I'd be trying to get out of that store ASAP just the same. |
I wouldn't, and I really don't think you would either. Both of us would just shrug and finish our business, because we're both intelligent enough to realize it's just a kid being silly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here is a real race hate crime:
http://cbs3.com/local/Police.Respond.Thousands.2.1579054.html
Wild packs of (black) people randomly attack (white) people.
No mention of the racial angle in the stories.
And the NYT runs on her front page some punk kid and his prank. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I believe you misunderstood Stefanuto, Steelrails. His argument isn't that African Americans possess a greater propensity to violence, but instead that a tragically disproportionate amount of blacks are murdered by other blacks.
Violence and oppression against blacks and Latinos is no longer the enterprise of prejudice in America but the unfortunate business paradigm of street gangs.
Meanwhile, we waste our time worrying transparent, symbolic crimes. That boy could have caused a riot with his Walmart prank. But he did not, and the police arrived long after a riot would have manifested.
The true burden of the black and Latino communities is racial inwardly, by their own discretion, but purely, criminally financial outwardly. One may make the argument that street gangs are the product of prejudice. There is an astounding amount of evidence to the contrary over a century of organized crime in America.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| Kabrams wrote: |
And I'm not even going to dignify Sergio's comments
with a response. |
Sorry to hear that. I was looking forward to discussing your ideas in the hope that a civil, calm yet frank discussion might take place, since not only are the US states with the highest murder rates also the states with the highest black populations, the phenomenon of black violence seems to be truly international:
International homicide rates:
1. Southern Africa
4. West and Central Africa
5. East Africa
6. Africa
7. Caribbean
11. World average
20. East and South-east Asia
21 (last). West and Central Europe
But the US government would have its police officers arrest people for racist behavior, which must necessarily divert police attention from murderous criminality (which is, ironically, disproprtionately black in perpetration). In what way is this an unreasonable critique? |
Yes because when I think of lily-white countries Mali, Senegal, Niger, Mauritania pop up in my mind. Where were they on the list?
There is also the thought that said violence in the top of the list countries might be due to the lack of resources and leftover damage from 400 years of colonialism (which included race-based slavery) and stripping the countries of resources.
After all when one thinks of violence, death, destruction, warfare, genocide, forced removal of indigenous peoples, chattel slavery, weapons of mass destruction, repeated breaking of treaties, war crimes, fire-bombings of cities, and the like, the LAST people to pop up in my mind are Western Europeans and their ilk.
Is that really the direction you want this conversation to go? The violence of the world and culture/race? Are you seriously trying to suggest that when it comes to violence, the people with the least blood on their hands are Western Europeans?
There's madmen a plenty to go around from Hitler (Occidental) to Stalin (Slavic) to Idi Amin (African) to Pol Pot (Asian) but I mean, come on...
If we should have more cops at work focusing on crime in black neighborhoods, we should flood Western European nations with military police and overseers to prevent that particular brand of violence.
| Quote: |
| feel making a public statement made in jest that offends black people should be marked on one's criminal record, and so forth |
When that kid used the mic he ceased to be a customer and was therefore trespassing (and possibly some sort of public endangerment charge) in the building. So yes, he should have a charge on his record, though as I've said before I'm iffy on the whole 'bias crime' thing due to the unknowns involved in the case, not to mention my ambivalence
towards hate crime legislation.
| Quote: |
| It's clear from this that his comment was made to sound exactly like a normal Wal-Mart announcement, making it, again, a harmless prank. If he had yelled it into the mic in a threatening tone, you would have a point. |
Saying it calmly or not has nothing to do with it. I could say "Alright everyone listen up this will only take a minute" in a calm voice in a bank, and if I did that I most assuredly would be charge with a crime, as well I should be.
That kind of thing is so not something you play around with.
If someone said "Attention Walmart Customers: All white people, leave the store now" I'd be trying to get out of that store ASAP just the same. They could be pranking or it could be the prelude to a bloodbath, either way I'm not sticking around to find out. You can and go ahead and laugh at me as I get out of there and its only a prank.
Then again sometimes it is a good idea to get out of the building even though people say it ain't so bad. See:9/11 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Are you seriously trying to suggest that when it comes to violence, the people with the least blood on their hands are Western Europeans? |
The homicide rates I cited concern only the present day. In the present day, you're a lot less likely to be murdered in states of the US, and in regions of the world, where there are fewer blacks. Crudely put, the greater the distance between oneself and a large population of blacks, the less likely being murdered appears to become. I realize this conclusion may offend some people, but that doesn't detract from its validity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Are you seriously trying to suggest that when it comes to violence, the people with the least blood on their hands are Western Europeans? |
The homicide rates I cited concern only the present day. In the present day, you're a lot less likely to be murdered in states of the US, and in regions of the world, where there are fewer blacks. Crudely put, the greater the distance between oneself and a large population of blacks, the less likely being murdered appears to become. |
Well you sure made me eat my words  
I think it would, perhaps, be more accurate to say that the murder per capita rate increases when in regions with greater numbers of economic and cultural under-classes that self-identify as "other" based on an arbitrary quality such as race.
That blacks are quite ubiquitous in this role in the Western world is the result more so of centuries of importation into and centralized oppression within of many thousands in the West than to genetics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Are you seriously trying to suggest that when it comes to violence, the people with the least blood on their hands are Western Europeans? |
The homicide rates I cited concern only the present day. In the present day, you're a lot less likely to be murdered in states of the US, and in regions of the world, where there are fewer blacks. Crudely put, the greater the distance between oneself and a large population of blacks, the less likely being murdered appears to become. I realize this conclusion may offend some people, but that doesn't detract from its validity. |
I believe the UK puts a dent in your theory. I'm going on my (sometimes inaccurate) memory, but blacks there have a lower crime rate than others. Or perhaps it was at the bottom income rung? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 38 Special wrote: |
| I think it would, perhaps, be more accurate to say that the murder per capita rate increases when in regions with greater numbers of economic and cultural under-classes that self-identify as "other" based on an arbitrary quality such as race. |
Improving the material conditions of any individual or group will assuredly improve their ethical standards. The problem is, this cannot be externally enforced. The onus is on individuals and groups to autonomously adopt decent and civilized values. The other problem is that, thanks to a long and labyrinthine series of government follies - redistribution, basically - it's difficult for blacks in the US and in other regions to make money via legitimate means.
| Bucheon Bum wrote: |
| I believe the UK puts a dent in your theory. I'm going on my (sometimes inaccurate) memory, but blacks there have a lower crime rate than others. Or perhaps it was at the bottom income rung? |
Off the top of my head, Moss Side (Manchester), Toxteth (Liverpool), Stoke Newington and Tottenham (London) and Blackbird Leys (Oxford) are all areas infamous for two things - having a lot of blacks and having a lot of crime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Are you seriously trying to suggest that when it comes to violence, the people with the least blood on their hands are Western Europeans? |
The homicide rates I cited concern only the present day. In the present day, you're a lot less likely to be murdered in states of the US, and in regions of the world, where there are fewer blacks. Crudely put, the greater the distance between oneself and a large population of blacks, the less likely being murdered appears to become. I realize this conclusion may offend some people, but that doesn't detract from its validity. |
Sorry, but given that the US' last war was in 2003, the present day is still right around the corner. Not to mention most nations except the US regard history in a bit longer terms than the recent decade.
1939 is still yesterday as far as I'm concerned. Heck, there are still millions of people alive today who were alive then. Historically, we are still in the present. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
This isn't a court of law, I don't need to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt to assert that it's true. You constantly freak out about black issues, immediately insult anyone who says anything remotely negative about blacks (no matter how justified the comment), feel making a public statement made in jest that offends black people should be marked on one's criminal record, and so forth. That's enough to convince me of your stance on the matter. If you feel your posting record is beyond reproach in this regard, you're welcome to feel that way. |
It didn't just offend black people--it offended nearly everyone in the store. And it's not just about "offense" it's about someone trespassing and causing a disturbance.
Yes, it should be marked on his juvenile record. IMO, a juvenile record shouldn't just be for punishment--it should be a record to indicate whether the kid needs help.
Anyway, a few weeks ago someone made a post about how calling blacks "bros" was racist, and yadda yadda. I stayed out of it (although I was in the thread) because I didn't agree.
I usually only say something when people make wide sweeping generalizations about black people (as evidenced by this thread).
And I'm confused at how over-exuberance in defending black people (your interpretation, not mine) = racist. How exactly does that work, again?
| Fox wrote: |
If you don't think those comments make me racist, why would you bring them up in this context? |
I'm illustrating a point.
I have never once denigrated white culture or Jewish culture or any other culture and yet for some reason I am the one called a "racist". I just find it interesting you assign hidden motives to me to prove my racism (every time it boils down to "Well, we know what you really think!!!), when I can point to some comments you've made that can absolutely be interpreted as racism (someone even remarked you went too far and were out of line with those comments).
I don't really know you beyond Dave's ESL, and while those comments are incendiary and really, really messed up there's a difference between completely messed up comments and actual racism.
| Fox wrote: |
Rocketscientist is just a troll trying to get attention, so he largely got ignored. You seem to genuinely want to partake in discussion, so your posts get addressed. Why would you even want to compare yourself to a troll like him? |
I wasn't aware of rocketscientists's troll status. It's now noted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kabrams wrote: |
| It didn't just offend black people--it offended nearly everyone in the store. And it's not just about "offense" it's about someone trespassing and causing a disturbance. |
Trespassing and causing a disturbance isn't what's being put on his record, so no, that's not what it's about kabrams.
| kabrams wrote: |
| Yes, it should be marked on his juvenile record. IMO, a juvenile record shouldn't just be for punishment--it should be a record to indicate whether the kid needs help. |
I live in a world where we can determine if a child needs help without using criminal records as a tool to that end. Outside of discussions where you're being forced to defend your racist worldview, I really think you live in such a world too. Putting a black mark on his criminal record over a harmless prank just shows how much this situation has degenerated in our society.
| kabrams wrote: |
| I'm illustrating a point. |
The point that I make statements which you yourself say aren't indicative of racism? I'm a very egalitarian person at heart, but I'm also very realistic. When I see trends, I admit to them. I'd much rather be honest about problems and see them potentially solved than blind myself to them the way our society has with regards to this particular problem. A segment of our society is behaving in an atypically dysfunctional fashion, resulting in members of that population on average committing more violent crimes, obtaining less education, and benefitting from a lower standard of living. I care about that, and I think it should be addressed. I'm just not willing to pretend it's somehow being forced on them by other social groups, no matter how much certain forces in our society would prefer that idea. Your anger at my expression of those ideas is just another example of why I've come to the conclusions that I have. Sergio is the same way; he simply posts hard data, and gets angry scorn in return instead of rational engagement.
| kabrams wrote: |
| I have never once denigrated white culture or Jewish culture or any other culture and yet for some reason I am the one called a "racist". |
This is like saying Affirmative Action isn't racist because it doesn't actually denigrate anyone's culture. But it clearly is a racist policy. Likewise, blacks voting for Obama in the Democratic primary at a nearly 90% rate was clearly racially-motivated (and thus racist), even though it didn't really denigrate anyone. So needless to say, even if your claim here is true (and I don't know whether it is or not), I don't consider it especially relevant.
| kabrams wrote: |
| I just find it interesting you assign hidden motives to me to prove my racism (every time it boils down to "Well, we know what you really think!!!), when I can point to some comments you've made that can absolutely be interpreted as racism (someone even remarked you went too far and were out of line with those comments). |
And some other people have come to the same conclusion as me. None the less, I don't consider either fact of any importance; I'm not prone to basing my opinions on what other people think of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
Trespassing and causing a disturbance isn't what's being put on his record, so no, that's not what it's about kabrams. |
Actually I don't want "intimidation bias" on his record. I do want harassment, trespassing and causing a disturbance on his record.
My thoughts != the police's thoughts.
| Fox wrote: |
I live in a world where we can determine if a child needs help without using criminal records as a tool to that end. Outside of discussions where you're being forced to defend your racist worldview, I really think you live in such a world too. Putting a black mark on his criminal record over a harmless prank just shows how much this situation has degenerated in our society. |
A criminal record that I would want expunged at 18. There have been multiple stories of children who fell through the system because they were not given records--I'm not talking about charging kids as adults, or trumping up charges. I'm talking about making notes so that a kid who has done something like this before doesn't get a pass.
| Fox wrote: |
| The point that I make statements which you yourself say aren't indicative of racism? |
Yes.
| Fox wrote: |
| I'm a very egalitarian person at heart, but I'm also very realistic. When I see trends, I admit to them. I'd much rather be honest about problems and see them potentially solved than blind myself to them the way our society has with regards to this particular problem. A segment of our society is behaving in an atypically dysfunctional fashion, resulting in members of that population on average committing more violent crimes, obtaining less education, and benefitting from a lower standard of living. I care about that, and I think it should be addressed. I'm just not willing to pretend it's somehow being forced on them by other social groups, no matter how much certain forces in our society would prefer that idea. |
Right, but you attribute those issues not to things like poverty--which shows a major increase in all the things you mentioned, but to the culture of those people who also happen to be poor.
And...you're surprised I have a problem with that?
Just like with the "acting white" thread where everyone assumed black people in general disliked education and did not like black people who achieved in school, you're completely off base.
As I've said before, there is dysfunction in the (overall? IDK) black culture, but there is also dysfunction in the trailer parks and Appalachia and Beverly Hills.
Many kids from Appalachia engage in crime, drugs, don't graduate from school, get pregnant, etc. and there can be a lot of overt racism there . But I wouldn't say Appalachian culture encourages this or is ridiculous/hateful. I would say poverty exacerbates these problems and have for years and years.
Same with the "black community".
| Fox wrote: |
| Your anger at my expression of those ideas is just another example of why I've come to the conclusions that I have. Sergio is the same way; he simply posts hard data, and gets angry scorn in return instead of rational engagement. |
Actually, I've addressed Sergio before and it all amounts to the same thing: I'm excusing behavior instead of simply staring at the stats and "agreeing" with them (as if there's such a thing).
Your "expression of those ideas" was to call black "culture" (my culture) ridiculous and hateful. There are almost 40 million black people in the US and yet somehow we all participate in a "hateful", "ridiculous" culture?
Really?
You said your experience is mostly with "urban" black folk in Chicago and parts of the upper Midwest (if I remember correctly). How can you realistically claim to even know enough to make that statement? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
This is like saying Affirmative Action isn't racist because it doesn't actually denigrate anyone's culture. But it clearly is a racist policy. Likewise, blacks voting for Obama in the Democratic primary at a nearly 90% rate was clearly racially-motivated (and thus racist), even though it didn't really denigrate anyone. So needless to say, even if your claim here is true (and I don't know whether it is or not), I don't consider it especially relevant. |
I don't think Affirmative Action is a racist policy.
Racially-motivated != racist. Seriously? Hahaha. A lot of people wanted to see a black man in office because maybe they thought it would change our country for the better, not because they hate white people.
Seriously, your definition of racism seems to be "anything that has to do with race, ever"
And I don't think white people voting for McCain because they think the world isn't ready for a black man is inherently racist, either.
[quote=Fox"]
And some other people have come to the same conclusion as me. None the less, I don't consider either fact of any importance; I'm not prone to basing my opinions on what other people think of them.[/quote]
Actually, you're the only one who's called me racist on Dave's ESL that I can remember.
 [/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Affirmative Action is not racist. Its merely a remedy to a past injustice. Inherent in Affirmative Action is its future obsolescence. Once the injustice is remedied, there will cease to be a need for Affirmative Action. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
