This Time, Do Not Hate
Just because someone else's life matters doesn't make your life matter any less. If we can't allow someone else to have a platform for a while, It may be our own insecurities and fears that are behind our response. - Nate Cook
First off, the above quote is not mine, but was lifted from a friend of a friendI have had the opportunity in my life to make a great many friends from highly varied and vastly different vocations: from engineer to professor to grocer, and from many different outlooks: from Christian to pagan to atheist. I believe that I have been blessed in every sense of the word to receive the considered (and sometimes not so considered) opinions and thoughts of this cadre of friends.
Every once in a while I see something posted on Facebook. I say every once in a while because I don't frequent social media all that much as I find it to be a tremendous waste of time. That said, I do occasionally see something that rings true to me, that lights up my sense of I'm not sure what, maybe morality would be the best descriptor. Yesterday I was on and I happened across a post from an old colleague of mine and I had that flood of recognition. This particular old friend, Brady Marston, I met in Fort Smith, Arkansas when we where both attending the U of A campus in Fort Smith. He was getting a degree in Mechanical Engineering while I was torturing myself with relearning the Calculus that I had forgotten in the 15 or so years since I dropped out of Graduate school to follow my... heart? Completely different story. Anyways, it appears that at some point, he became a pastor (don't worry, I am getting to the point). So from the point of view of a pastor and friend of mine:
Personally, I'm not a fan of playing cause whack-a-mole. Rather than find individual problems and address them, I'd much rather look at the big picture and address overall problems. I say that to give some background when I say that I think I understand people's hang-ups around systemic racism.
Why is racism all anybody wants to talk about right now? Why talk about black poverty and not just poverty? Why talk about racial bias in the criminal justice system when we all know that it's broken for everybody?
The answer I've found is that the conversation (the argument) happening right now isn't really about these small issues and it really isn't about racism. While these are important issues, I think we get stuck in the weeds when we discuss them in too much detail before we get on the same page on the overall, big picture issue, racial injustice. Or even more generally, systemic injustice as it relates to race.
Why is racism all anybody wants to talk about right now? Why talk about black poverty and not just poverty? Why talk about racial bias in the criminal justice system when we all know that it's broken for everybody?
The answer I've found is that the conversation (the argument) happening right now isn't really about these small issues and it really isn't about racism. While these are important issues, I think we get stuck in the weeds when we discuss them in too much detail before we get on the same page on the overall, big picture issue, racial injustice. Or even more generally, systemic injustice as it relates to race.
Left unchecked, all systems tend towards injustice. Without concerted effort, all experience is profoundly private and it's incredibly difficult for those who run systems to understand the perspective of those who work under it.
I think we've all experienced a boss who is completely incapable of understanding the actual needs of employees. This is because even if the boss was once an employee for the company, the boss is no longer in that position and must put out extra effort to understand the needs of the people being managed. (This is the entire premise of Undercover Boss)
Another important factor is that self-preservation is an incredibly powerful force. Unless held accountable, people at the top, with some exceptions, will work for their own self-interest instead of the good of the whole organization. This is why our system of government has so many checks and balances and ethics rules.
Finally, the larger the system, the slower change occurs. The wheels of government turn slowly. A few well-meaning people who want to make a difference will quickly run up against this fact and that's why so many promising reform-based political careers sputter out when politicians arrive in Washington.
So far, my point has been that systems tend toward injustice. Even without open hostility, the people at the top don't understand and, thus, don't address the concerns of the people at the bottom. They don't have much incentive to and when that incentive does show up in individual leaders, it usually doesn't outlast the slow pace of change. Left to itself, systemic injustice will persist or even worsen.
Finally, the larger the system, the slower change occurs. The wheels of government turn slowly. A few well-meaning people who want to make a difference will quickly run up against this fact and that's why so many promising reform-based political careers sputter out when politicians arrive in Washington.
So far, my point has been that systems tend toward injustice. Even without open hostility, the people at the top don't understand and, thus, don't address the concerns of the people at the bottom. They don't have much incentive to and when that incentive does show up in individual leaders, it usually doesn't outlast the slow pace of change. Left to itself, systemic injustice will persist or even worsen.
This is why the Bible has such a profound concern for the people on the underside of the system. In the parable of the sheep and the goats, the sheep are the ones who feed the hungry, give water to the thirsty, invite in the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick, and visit the prisoner. The sheep are the ones who care for the ones who wouldn't receive care otherwise.
This is what's at stake in Jesus' statements about the sick needing a doctor. In first century Jewish society, "sinner" wasn't so much a designation of immoral activity, but of social status. A sinner was out of fellowship with the synagogue and not allowed to participate.
Good Jews weren't to associate with sinners and, as a result, sinners were permanently stuck on the outside of Jewish society. Jesus pushed back against this system in both his actions and his words.
He spent his time with sinners. He told the religious leaders that the good shepherd leaves the 99 to go after the 1. He told them that the guest list at the great banquet of the Lord would be made up of sinners that had been gathered from the streets. The people who had been excluded by the synagogue were the people Jesus sought out to make insiders.
Widows and orphans aren't some magic categories of people that God cares about above all others. They are the people consistently marginalized in patriarchal systems because they have no patriarch to speak up for them. Mary's song in Luke 1 praises God for lifting up the humble and bringing down the rulers from their thrones. The activity of God is profoundly activity against systemic injustice.
It is a historical fact that the society of European immigrants in North America has had racial injustice baked into it from our very early years. For centuries, the majority even looked at this injustice as a net good. This isn't a uniquely American phenomenon. This isn't the only injustice baked into American life, but racial injustice was objectively a driving force behind our early economic success.
It is a historical fact that the society of European immigrants in North America has had racial injustice baked into it from our very early years. For centuries, the majority even looked at this injustice as a net good. This isn't a uniquely American phenomenon. This isn't the only injustice baked into American life, but racial injustice was objectively a driving force behind our early economic success.
Europeans were able to thrive in the Americas because of free labor in the South (and on the Caribbean islands). It was one giant economic system and without southern slavery, the whole thing looks completely different.
This isn't a reason for shame. Very few Americans hold slaves today or have close ancestors who did. This is, however, how American systemic injustice took on a profoundly racial shape.
Americans, on the whole, are people of good conscience and for 250 years, we had to live with ourselves while slaves were held in bondage on our shores based almost entirely upon their race.
This need to justify ourselves resulted in all kinds of biases and assumptions regarding the natural order of things. Slave owners in the South rightfully grew fearful of their slaves who outnumbered them. These biases, assumptions, and fears persisted and grew for generations.
I said earlier that systems tend toward injustice. The slaveholding United States didn't just tend toward racial injustice, it was actively pushed in that direction.
In my understanding, there have been two successful pushbacks against systemic racism in our history in both the 18 and 19 '60s. Both were moments of great conflict and distress, but both resulted in objective gains for black Americans.
In my understanding, there have been two successful pushbacks against systemic racism in our history in both the 18 and 19 '60s. Both were moments of great conflict and distress, but both resulted in objective gains for black Americans.
Since the 1960s, black and white Americans have been largely explicitly equal under the law. Unfortunately, the years since haven't been characterized by continued pressure against systemic racial injustice in America.
In the long term, rather than make us more aware of the injustice, the civil rights movement of the 1960s has allowed us to tell ourselves that racial injustice in the United States has been dealt with and doesn't exist anymore.
Systems have memory. Systems change slowly. Racial injustice was been baked into American life for 350 years. If the last 50 years was characterized by stamping the remnants of racial injustice out wherever they could be found, we might be able to declare victory today.
Instead, we've taken our foot off the gas. We've pushed back against other injustices, but basically declared victory on racial injustice and moved on.
It didn't take 100 years this time, but it seems that we've reached another crisis point in America's struggle with racial injustice. The explicitly legal racial injustice in our nation was dealt with 50 years ago, but now it's time to deal with the biases, assumptions, and fears that have been baked into our system for 400 years head on.
I don't know what the solution is right now. I don't think anybody does. I think we're all framing the problem imperfectly. What was helpful for me was realizing that the problem isn't so much a problem of racism as a problem of our American brand of systemic injustice--systemic injustice that is profoundly racial in character.
The first step in finding solutions is for us to acknowledge that the problem exists. Nobody needs to be ashamed of things they didn't do. What we need to be is determined to not let another generation of Americans experience this kind of injustice.
The consistent call of scripture is to be people who see the injustice around us and actively push back against it. The consistent call of scripture is to be a people who freely repent of our old ways of looking at things and seek to have the eyes of Christ who had compassion for the suffering of others. The consistent call of scripture is to be the hands and feet of Jesus and to help those in need. The consistent call of scripture is to use whatever power and influence we have to advocate for those who aren't being heard.
At its best, the call to recognize systemic racism in America isn't a call to shame. It isn't a call to start frantically putting Band-Aids on all the problems we can find. It's a hope that people will hear the cry of the oppressed, accept that it's real, and commit to pushing back against it again. The work wasn't completed in the 1960s and 400 years is long enough. Let's do this.
"But let justice roll on like a river,
righteousness like a never-failing stream!"
righteousness like a never-failing stream!"
Amos 5:25
Now, the reason that I posted this is not because I am a religious person. I was, once upon a time, then I was atheist, now I do not know what is going on, so I make no claims. But in this instance, I gain insight into how people work and how people should work. If that insight came from scripture, that is well and good. That it comes from one whom I consider a friend, that is better. I will take insight into the human condition on any day.
Thank you Brady for letting me use your writings as a jumping off point for discussion.
Tags
Who is online
267 visitors
Excellent article.
Excellent article, well done Thomas.
The points are presented in a clear, appealing manner. The quality of presentation deserves applause. But the points raised do need discussion.
First of all there has been recognition of a problem. The effort to redress those recognized problems resulted in the creation of an institutionalized system for civil rights. Institutionalized remedies to address recognized civil rights problems have been expanded over the last five decades. The institutionalized system for civil rights has been incorporated into all levels of government, into all levels of education, and into all levels of private sector activities.
There has been a lot of discussion about systemic injustice. The prescribed solution for systemic injustice has been introspection and honest scrutiny of the system, itself. The expectation has been the need to identify and recognize that systemic biases have established systemic privilege, favoritism, and unfair prejudices.
Why would the institutionalized system for civil rights be exempt from trending toward injustice as has been seen with other systems? Why would the institutionalized system for civil rights be exempt from allowing pursuit of self benefit at the expense of the larger organization as has been seen with other systems? Why would the institutionalized system for civil rights be exempt from systemic biases establishing privilege, favoritism, and unfair prejudices as has been seen with other systems?
Black Lives Matter does provide a platform. But how is that BLM platform being used? Is BLM a recognition of problems or an outgrowth of systemic injustice embedded in the institutionalized system for civil rights? Is BLM seeking justice or is BLM reinforcing a systemic injustice? Is BLM seeking a remedy or is BLM seeking a self benefit at the expense of the larger organization? BLM hasn't been calling for introspection and honest scrutiny of the institutionalized system for civil rights. BLM has been calling for expansion of the institutionalized system for civil rights. BLM has been placing blame on systemic injustice embedded in other systems without recognition that the institutionalized system for civil rights was expressly created to address and redress civil rights problems.
Is Black Lives Matter seeking a justice or an injustice? I don't think that question can be answered without introspection and honest scrutiny of the institutionalized system for civil rights.
I don't accept that is is either of those choices. Black Lives Matter is an organic reaction of the black community in America to the continual disrespect received by them at the hands of the police and the seeming indifference of the white population to their plight. I would say that they are finally gaining some ground on the recognition aspect.
I would say that they are seeking justice on several levels: On the police issue, they not only seek justice for the killing and mistreatment at the hands of the police but also the degree to which they are stopped, detained, arrested or otherwise harassed as a function of their skin color. If you are asking whether or not the movement is receiving more pushback than than it is generating forward thrust, I could only opine that I would certainly hope not.
The larger organization of what?
As far as the "institutionalized system for civil rights" is concerned, it must be broken if the people whom it is supposed to be helping are saying that it does not help. That is the whole point. If it were working, they would not have to form a group called Black Lives Matter.
How can you seriously ask this question? I should think that a after a quick perusal of the amounts of stories that come out on a daily basis supporting the proposition that black people are treated as less than in the American society of today, that the answer would be self evident: Justice. We should definitely look at ourselves and the actions that we take as individuals to make sure that they are in line with making a space for all people at the table. This self inspection and self giving is a large part of what I agree with in Brady's writing, because we all have to step up to the plate. But we also have to make sure to not remain silent when we see people not behaving in a just manner.
Speak up. Speak out.
Know Justice. Know Peace.
Black Lives Matter is the focal point of some strong conservative outrage, because they are bold and determined to confront the outrage to black lives due to police violence.
Parkland, Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School students started a 'movement' in 2018 (where are they now).
The "Women's March" on January 21st, 2017 begin something starling and powerful (where are they now).
We need these groups this year to merge into one large co-operative 'entity' seeking after the soul of America. In this way, the mouths and pens of the critics of change in America can be set-back or silenced for a good long time.
We need our champions from the recent past to shine forth like 'crazy' sparking diamonds in the sun of our politics!
This is what I felt when I first read Brady's post. Though his view is from a particularly Christian viewpoint, I feel that what he is really saying is that we all have to come together in spirit to fight the injustice with not only Black Lives Matter, but when we see it and we know it to be wrong, that is when we have to stand up.
There is unspoken might in numbers which can speak for itself to shut the mouths of those who love to throw up obstacles, and obstructions to others' liberties. If we really have this strength-now is the moment to be present and all-in (together)!
I have no idea what his views re: African-Americans are-- but while I could be wrong it sure does sound like the sort of question a racist would ask
(I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt and assume its just a case of him being very, very uninformed)
I truly can not get why in the age of technology, and space tech at that, "cavemen and women" still exist ready for combat! It seems there is always somebody given a platform to drag people back down into the pit of ignorance and repression. Oxymoronic as it is, being people stuck in the past, you would thing neanderthals could not find leadership roles! Yet, here and there they are with their claws dug into the deep dirt impeding this nation's advancement in people, thought, and actions.
We need this summer and fall to be big for liberties for liberals! Go big! Do not stay home! Vote for all its worth. Find those parkland 'kids,' locate those founding the women's march, join up with Black Lives Matter, and meet in August with Reverend Sharpton in the March on Washington (DC)!
Actually I do believe that's why he raised them.
He posted this because he actually wants to encourage discussion!!!
(But then my guess is that you already knew that),
Nerm-- I actually had to read your comment three times before I think I understand it. I could be wrong, but It seems that long convoluted diatribe is basically a way of claiming that the BLM is seeking injustice. Pretending to want a non-biased in-depth discussion, while the real intent was to "Raise the issue" of BLM might "possibly" (ahem) be seeking injustice!
A point that could've been made in one sentence.
Again, I could be wrong, but it seems to me that that extremely long, rambling comment was an attempt to raise the point that BLM "Might" (might--ahem...) be seeking injustice-- while attempting to disguise that by making the pretense that you wanted to investigate everything with great objectivity and in great depth.
P.S: Discussing whether BLM is seeking justice or injustice is total horseshit IMO. Why?
1. First of all, it pre-supposes that everyone in BLM is seeking the same thing. An over-generalization...to say the least! Did you ever consider the possibility that some may be seeking one thing-- other seeking something else. And still others seeking something else?
And some may be seeking more than one thing.
An attempt to stereotype such a large group as all seeking the same thing is absurd!
2. Secondly, what is injustice in this case? What is justice? Different people have different ideas of each-- so how the hell can you "discover" what the BLM is seeking?
(My guess is that most Trump supporters think whatever they do..they're seeking injustice. Most on the other side of the spectrum think they're seeking justice.
So do we want to while away the hours chasing our tails discussing whether they are seeking justice or injustice?
(Reminds me of long discussions (well, arguments actually) between Believers and Atheists. Both sides have at least one thing in common-- they both have the belief that the existence-- or non-existence -- of God can be proven!)
Exactly. I believe Nerm-L was insinuating that what one person may consider injustice, may not be an injustice to another; that it's all very open to interpretation.
And FYI... I don't generalize people's thoughts based on political affiliation either. A "don't lump me in with 'those' morons" comes to mind when people "call out" "Trump supporters." The other way around works too. I don't like seeing people stereotyping in any sense; it's just another form of prejudice in my opinion. Take it for what it's worth... or don't. It's only an opinion. To make assumptions based on one thing you know about a person / people is a stereotype or the creation of one.
As the Wiccan Rede states: "If it harms none, do as you will." Simple statement and I find it a pretty good way to live by.
The protesters are claiming that justice requires a degree of introspection. The protesters are airing grievances, assigning guilt, and demanding remedies without any introspection. So, the question is whether or not BLM can achieve justice?
The protesters' grievances are a rehash of past grievances that have already been recognized. As a nation, we established an institutionalized system for civil rights that was intended to address those grievances. That system for civil rights has been incorporated into all levels of government, all levels of education, and all level of private sector activities. The system for civil rights has the authority to impose remedies to address civil rights grievances. As a nation, we have made discrimination a Federal crime to address civil rights grievances by minority groups.
BLM is protesting under the umbrella of the institutionalized system for civil rights. The system for civil rights is an institution consisting of laws, social mandates, judicial precedents, a variety of government agencies at all levels of government, and a variety of organizational functions within the private sector. The system for civil rights is not only government's responsibility; the system for civil rights is an institutionalized social responsibility.
Is that institutionalized system for civil rights working as intended? Has the system for civil rights trended toward injustice? Has the system for civil rights allowed pursuit of self-benefit at the expense of the country? Is BLM really seeking justice or is BLM an outgrowth of institutional injustice?
And the protesters are claiming that justice requires a degree of introspection.
BLM surprisingly is making an impact. Society has rallied to the plea of the black male deaths in this country. It has had enough of the rhetoric that changes nothing. Fellow citizens, diverse of skin, are decorating the streets, cities, and landscape with the beauty of their beings to say; Police you will not do this in our name.
Flags in some of the 'haunts' of this country, classy groups with 'irregular' names (Dixie Chicks; Lady Antebellum) are pulling up stakes and moving away from the past. All because BLM persists until society could catch up and place its own hand on the baton.
The "South will rise again" just lost its echo effect in the deepest parts of Dixie. Dixie, the anthem at long-last is waning. RIP.
That emotively appealing description is supposed to justify uncivilized behavior under the auspices of institutional civil rights. Institutional civil rights was intended to curb uncivilized behavior; not to justify uncivilized behavior.
Are the protests abusing institutional civil rights to justify uncivilized behavior? Why isn't your emotively appealing description a form of gaslighting ? An abuser uses gaslighting to justify their abuse and induce a victim to accept being abused. The victim is induced to accept blame for an abusers uncivilized behavior.
Gaslighting?! Why are you being indulgent to ask such a foolish thing? What uncivilized behavior are you referring? Simple protesting of the deaths of black people by the hands (and feet) of police is not uncivilized behavior?
And, in another area of your discussion you are referring to "institutional civil rights" as meaning the appropriate channels for civil complaints to follow. Is that it? My question to you would be this: The constitution does state:
Therefore, taking to the streets is not uncivilized behavior. It is constitutional behavior. As to any other method or methods you will have to be distinct in asking and stating. Furthermore, I hasten to remind you that when conservatives were " revolutionaries " knives, guns, and amories were the name of the game!
Can't get more emotional than holding multiple wars in efforts to relieve and continue men and women under bondage, mistreatment, and separation from their unalienable (God-ordained) rights in this country.
Why not just quote the first amendment , which is what the 3rd article became and was adopted as?
There is also a qualifying word in the right to assemble and petition the government for grievences , that word would be "peaceful".
Is a riot , involving property destruction, peaceful and civilized?
I would think not and where many loose interest in support of any protest it is involved with.
Is Looting considered a peaceful activity during a protest? or is it plainly theft?
Hi Mark! Take notice that I stated this too: "Therefore, taking to the streets is not uncivilized behavior. It is constitutional behavior. As to any other method or methods you will have to be distinct in asking and stating."
Rioting and looting are violent forms of protests. In the sense that sometimes either one or both (rioting or looting) trail on the heels of peaceful protesting, no pun intended. One could ask, why peaceful protests at times deteriorate into those former protest models. Or, understanding the models, how to deescalate problems and issues such that protest of itself is short, focused, and remedied. War is the ultimate protest event.
There have been over 4000 BLM protests worldwide since May 25, 2020. The overwhelming majority had NO looting or destruction of property.
Those that perpetrated property crimes or violence should be prosecuted. Those that didn't should have their grievances addressed.
World wide protests mean jack to me , if they have the same issue in their own countries and want to jump on the bandwagon to get things changed there , the more the merrier. for their effort to do something there for themselves , does it have an effect here , highly doubtful .
We agree those that were not peacefully protesting and breaking civil laws , need procecuted and sentences metted out , and that includes infringing on others constitutional rights in the exersize of their own.
And i have always agreed that it is past time to look into how police do their jobs , and it was past time that should all be reviewed and regulated more effieciently and tightly.
The overwhelming majority of protests HERE were peaceful too Mark.
Do you have an example of that for clarity?
My friend, George Floyd didn't do it. I don't know why people are so stupid even in their activism. Those people did not get that from George Floyd! Murder and larceny was found in their own hearts and minds.
Simple , seattle CHOP zone .
you are free to disagree and [deleted]
I'm pretty sure that any crimes being committed there would be property crimes or violence. I doubt that anyone will be charged with violating anyone's Constitutional rights. The reason that I believe that is that no such charge was made against anyone who was arrested at the Charlottesville 'protest'.
Thanks for stating the obvious.
The part about people thinking a fight has been won and basically becoming complacent rings true.
I have actually heard some people says race relations is no longer a problem.
Of course any person with open eyes knows that is not the case.
.
Complacency is a very large factor. Last week, I was reminded that we all have a role to play. We cannot just sit by and be idle and say the world will take care of it. Because then we are putting the load on others when we, as an individual and as a society, have to change in order for the changes to be realized by others.
From another of Brady's postings on Facebook:
It is interesting to note that in the Hindu religion they have a similar (not the same, but similar) idea where a person gives away everything and goes forth. I can't really remember much more than that right now... but the idea is that by giving of yourself you receive much more in return. And while I do not claim any religion, I can see where to fully embrace such an idea, an ideal, say to replace "Jesus" with "Black Lives Matter" (sorry Brady!) would give you the freedom to be a force for change. It would certainly make one a better person.
Wow-- that sounds a lot like Donald Trump!
Yep-- that's sarcasm.
I actually love the Hindu religion's basic belief structure. I don't know if many people realize that it's the oldest of the organized religions.
I don't think many people don't realize how many people have that misconception. I do ...as I was involved in Integral Yoga's LYT programme. ("Living Yoga Training"-- it was a work study programme. Among other things we met for an hour everyday to discuss The Sutras (we had a reading assigned every day-- came to class and discussed it).
This was at Yogaville, deep in the Virginia woods. Integral Yoga's guru was Swami Satchidananda, he was the Yogi who came to Woodstock to talk to everyone about chillin' Out (the one with darker orange robe)
He was known as the "Ecumenical Yogi", and for, among other things, this saying:
Truth is one, paths are many...
???
Do you actually believe that all the people in BLM think "the fight has been won"?
Do you actually believe that all the people in BLM basically become complacent?
Well, OK-- do you feel that most people in BLM feel the fight's been won. How about African-Americans and other persecuted minorities (even those not in BLM)-- do you think they feel the fights been won?
Do you think Trump and other racists believe they have totally "won their fight"?
Actually I do agree that some people feel the fight's been won (However I wonder how many African Americans feel that the fights been won,). And yes some people are complacent. (Always have and probably always will).
The problem I have with what you said-- its one heck of an over-generalization!
I think that the comments were addressed, both in Brady's, Ender's and my cases, to the people who BLM is trying to move off of dead center. That is where the complacency was, not in BLM.
Thank you Thomas.
Correct.
This is a really 'moving' article. I wish you would tighten up certain aspects of the paragraph spacing to induce excitement. It can help. That said, I like your frank and 'front' style of writing. You involved and exposed yourself - that's good. You spoke of faith, but you balanced that with its lack. You speak of race disharmony and the systems affecting it in America. Very well.
I will offer you this overall perspective. Black people have always been the 'baseline' for minority differences in a majority 'white' society. That is, other minorities look to their black 'big brothers and sisters' in civil rights when it comes to carrying around a background, a lengthy track record, a non-stop set of experiences that deal with the issues of slave services, "↑up from slavery," reconstruction issues, Jim Crow society, share-cropping (like living on a plantation), repressive under the wage floor, displacement by every newly arriving group of immigrants (though here already) as a means of control. Et ceteras. . . .
The point being, it has been said that if you wish to make friendly show yourself as friendly. Also, that imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Well, in general, neither of those worked for black 'America,' because society rolled with keeping one type of people with their 'noses' in the struggle for the essentials. Don't give them too much and they won't ever figure out just how much there is to possess (in this land of milk and honey')!
Until George Floyd's death along with a rash of other "streamed" black male deaths, there has been a monopoly of Americans (all echelons) who chose to believe black men could not articulate in White society, generally speaking. So it was easy to overlook blacks and their offspring as a body entirely. Society knows what a black male is in general, because it knew how he was 'kept.' Outside the inner circles.
There was something, well, special, about watching the "sufficiency" of George Flold, a black male metaphor, lying under a white authority figure having the spirit pressed out of it mercilessly. George Floyd 'articulated' the plight of minorities well and good and that registered in the minds of a majority of white people who had not been able to process what black people experienced as a matter of it happening in time and space.
Why is racism all anybody wants to talk about right now?
Actually I spent a fair amount of time watching the news-- mostly on Fox and MSNBC. There was so much coverage of the Virus, how its increasing in certain states, various aspects re: how quickly various states opened, several aspects of mask wearing or not, that NY State now has the lowest incidence of new cases in the country...and on and on.
Also some coverage of BLM and police-related issues.
But mostly about the Virus.
Oh-- and the economic impact. Would we fully recover? If so when?
And a big discussion about the recent elction polls.
Maybe I'm not watching the same news as you are-- because racism (or another topic, racial justice) was not discussed nearly as much. So what I experienced was not that racism was not all that anybody wants to talk about. (Well, maybe I'm wrong about what I experienced).
Metaphorical question. And the post that was inspirational to my writing of the article was from earlier in the month, before people started to realize that we were still in the middle of a pandemic.
That is an actual quote from the article. (Not from me, friend Krishna.) I got the sense of Thomas' perspective, nevertheless and engaged it openly and honestly. I am writing this with a mask on, so I am keenly aware of the virus these days as some of my own limited edition articles have been about it!
No one, certainly not me or anybody I know, wanted sporadic police violence to become a "rage issue" this year—especially when the whole country is in the fight for its very life against an invisible microbe. This came anyway; the rioting and looting following close behind.
For an interesting insight on race and prejudice in the United States review "The Three Races that Inhabit the United States" chapter 10 in Alexis De Tocqueville's Democracy in America (1830's).
Well that was interesting reading for its time, yes?
I assure you - it is relevant for today.
Why? Please elaborate. Have we made no advances politically since 1830? Curious.
It's about 90 pages.
I'm not unwilling to summarize but even that would be a significant post.
The spoiler is that he observed more hatred against black people in the free states than in the slave states. Basically in the slave states, slaves were not competition where as in the free states, the freed slave was an economic and social threat to whites. Black people in the free states had rights on paper but were not allowed to exercise them. "Jim Crow" was already in place in the north long before the Civil War.
Another section describes the failed economic model of slavery compared to how the free states operated.
It is worth the time to download and read.
Sorry - an after thought. Consider Tocqueville's observations the closer the black race came to equality with the white race the greater the hatred.
What is happening now. The majority sees the possibility of actual social, judicial, and economic equality with the minority as a possibility and they are afraid. The majority sees it as a zero sum game. If the minority advances, they will lose.
So yes - Tocqueville is worth the read.
I am a tad perplexed. I have Scribd reading services. (Scribd.com) and this title by that author's name comes in versions with a thousand plus pages ! Even the chapter you specified in your comment is a different chapter in the book I chose to look into by this author.
[This is not an ad promotion.]
Your assistance will be appreciated to get on the right track with your 'request.' (Smile.)
That is a problem. Because its continues to be a never-ending tale of white authority figures acting on their self-loathing of the black people in its midst. Moreover, the whole country will suffer from a renewed national mental illness. Right now, the disease is re-manifesting itself in the form of the state authorities man-handling black males. The good news diagnosis is there is a large swath of whites and other diverse people who recognize this disease for what it is. This time, these folks are coming out to heal the breach before it can metastasize and make the whole head sick!
Perhaps this time, racism, fear, as a mental illness, won't corrupt the sanity of this nation. Maybe this time we can all win.
You are tacking to the heart of this. Much of what is happening here is due to the historically silent understanding that our country never intended to have to share wealth with its slave population. There are long family lines of white conservatives who do not envision giving up any white freedoms and privileges to the masses of minorities and women, atknown the nation's wealth and its ability to create wealth. These folks point to the constitution alone, because it is limiting. Then they go farther and point to the constitution and the bill of rights. Begging off the remaining amendments after the tenth amendment to the great document.
We know what significantly comes after the first ten amendments (Bill of Rights) to the Constitution.
Much more can be stated. Your comment is a good 'starter' to this. It can be interesting to see just how deep and frank NT can be about this one!
CB,
You bring up a good point regarding the Constitution and Bill of Rights (BoRs). What many people often forget is that black men had more rights than any woman far sooner according to the BoRs. And I can guarantee that, for example, you (a black man) and I (a white woman) went for the same job with the same credentials in the automotive world (which I’ve been a part of for 25+ years), you would be the preferred person to hire. The only reason you would be bypassed and I get that job is if you demanded more money than they were willing to pay you. There’s very few positions that a woman would get equal or more pay than any man of any color.
I’m not saying your rights and my rights are any more or less important here. I know that there’s issues with equality and that racism is still very much alive. I’m not trying to diminish the main point of the article either. It’s simply an observation. An unfairness that many people forget about. The most oppressed and least represented is black women. Quite frankly, unless the middle aged (or older) white male is comfortable in society, these things will continue to be an issue. And I realize not all white males fit this category. I know plenty of white males that don’t fit that stereotype. It is a broad generalization. But who are the current (and most in the past) so-called leaders in the “developed” countries around the world? Yes, I understand in Asian countries, they aren’t white males, but Europe? US? Canada? And yes, there’s a few women, but sadly most often they are figureheads.
I wrote a college paper regarding executive boards of major corporations in MI. The only one that started actually appointing women because of qualifications was a steel mill but only after a Swedish man became CEO. Otherwise, prior to that, there were “secretaries” only on that executive board; she had a PhD in business operations while the white male board members had associate and bachelor degrees at best. Ford Motor Company’s executive board consisted (at the time I wrote the paper) of one black female (to “prove” there was “representation” of both black people and women), one white female (but is Bill Ford’s wife), and the rest.... you guessed it, middle aged white males. GM’s executive board only changed after Mary Barra became CEO. And Mary Barra became CEO because the rest of the board wanted to pin the massive ignition cylinder issues on her while they all retired.
Sorry to derail a little. I’m just as angry and frustrated with “the system” as anyone.
Glad to help. The section under consideration is in Volume I at the end of the volume. Chapter XVIII.
You can pick your reading format choice and it is free and legal to download or read online.
C-Span did a substantial series on Tocqueville some 20 years ago - I don't think this particular topic was covered but here is the link
While in the United States this is displaying as White vs. Black, at the root is the linkage of wealth, judicial, political power and "class" mobility. (While "The poor you will always have with you", you don't want them to be the same poor "always")
I'll put forward the position that there has been no real evolution of the human heart in recorded documentation. There have been laws and constitutions but their implementation is always limited by the nature of that unchanging heart. Still I believe it is possible to change the accepted behaviors in a society.
Hi MsAubrey! I am just 'arriving' to this area—late. "There’s very few positions that a woman would get equal or more pay than any man of any color." That is the larger problem with social constructs, isn't it? They have to be worked on daily to keep them in place. And when not-they 'rust' and peel away. There are forces in our country that do not wish for women to succeed under their own power. For hundreds of years those conservatives go about their programs reminding women that their place is in the home, under the covering of a husband and God.
I am fully aware that black (male) slaves were freed nearly 60 years and a great war involving a divide in the thinking of white men mostly, ahead of women's right to vote (suffrage). This 'bit' in history has always been fascinating to me. Because it speaks to the 'prism' of complexities that is the white male. Blessed with much besides, the white 'man' is made of intestinal sterner stuff which is fascinating and attractive-even as the grouping that is white males even has a strong penchant for separating others into subcategories of humanity.
If/when we are being brutally honest, no race on earth wants to 'quit' white men entirely. They are our joy and our 'burden.' (I know. They say the inverse about us!)
If it is any consolation, I think a new "ingredient" has been poured into the mixing bowl just now. Diversity is breaking out in the youth (and 'old folks') and it is as if we all finally see that we can trust each other with each other—for the first time. Bravo! To the images and the movement our cameras have been portraying of recent months, though the virus has gotten to us-love is knitting us together out of the tragedies on our phone cameras!
Let ask the youth and old folks to fix the broken-ness between us this time for real; and, let no presidential 'divider clown' ever split us apart again!
More later.
May I ask: All ten sections of that chapter? Under the heading: Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races In The United States
Racism is stupid plain and simple. May who dwell in it are just too lazy to think how to get out of it. As to those others who use hatred as a medium, they are (master) manipulators! Hatred of others allows these people to walk in pride of self—undeserved. Hatred allows them to consume the wealth meant for others as selfishness ("I need it all for me and mine!) There are racists in our country who plan to 'restore' the black 'race' to a subordinate position under a superior white people. In the past, they accomplished this task with a mere stroke of their pens, wiping out the black races freedoms, privileges, wealth, and unalienable rights for the duration.
What kind of human being can look into the mind of another human being and work diligently to convince that one he and she is subhuman? Some conservative relics are actually attempting to do this in our day. It begins by creating a mass delusion that truth is what one man, one leader, says it is. Thus, making himself the personification of all that is important to know and follow after (a cult of personality), and then it spreads like a virus. . . .
I guess you could get by with just reading "Situation of the Black Race in the United States, Dangers Entailed for the Whites by Its Presence"
Towards the last of Part 3 and then Part 4 in the pdf of Chapter XVIII
Parts 1 and 2 really lay out the problems the Native Americans faced trying to fit.
Oh - about 1/3 of the population - at least.
I work from the "fallen angels" idea. If a third of the angels, who spent their entire existence in the presence of God, could be convinced that they deserved to be elevated above God and the other created beings, then humans can't be any better.
Now and then I get all Calvinistic and believe in "Total Depravity."
Ah! I see now. Total depravity indeed! I am familiar with Calvinism. (I rejected it for myself, nevertheless.)
I want to reject it.
Hmm? Maybe we can have a talk about it some time. (I am really interested.)
Okay, I will read those two in the interest of time. Part 1 was anachronistic to our interests.
Thank you for responding. Striving for Equality dovetails with striving for Racial Justice. Both have to do with breaking out of societal models.
Is simply making others aware of these injustices going to be enough to overcome all of the social inertia of an entrenched status quo? I don't think that we should, "... tak
enour foot off the gas," so to speak anytime soon. Until the fix is in... How do we identify when that is? What is the de-facto endgame? It is hard to define when we aren't even sure of How to end the Why of these injustices.Bump. Calvinism.
Okay Adam! That was interestingly depressing reading. The two sections, I can see how it is was suitable thinking and conjecture of the period. Why is it your opinion it is suitable now? I do not see it that way at all.
It is a major problem in social constructs. I am very aware of feelings some people have about women, independence, and power. As stated before, I've been in the automotive world for 25+ years. The only reason I got the first job in the auto world was because they feared I would sue them... the female accountant even told them she'd help me hire a lawyer to do so. I've fought HARD to get to where I am today. I was lucky enough to kind of fall into my current position in IT. The IT part was self taught. I went to school for aircraft maintenance and repair and you want to talk about discrimination... not only was I one of 3 women in the school at the time, but I was never in the military. There were far more black men in that school than women in total. The women were degraded by other students. We [the women] had it bad there. I had guys trash my car when I refused to sleep with them. When I got seriously injured, some of the guys LAUGHED [I almost lost my left hand... and they laughed].
Then I worked in prototype automotive for several years. That went almost as "well" as aircraft maintenance and repair school. In my first interview they treated me like crap and when I stood up for myself and walked out, I got a call 20 minutes later that I got the job. I found out later that they wanted to see if I could "handle being in a shop." Then, I became the only pregnant mechanic in a shop and was laid off at the end of my maternity leave.
The first place I actually got any kind of respect, and it certainly wasn't from everyone [some were downright cruel], was when I worked for a government contractor building prototype military trucks for test. I met my current husband there; then, I was the only pregnant mechanic they'd ever had too. My supervisor was awesome though and he's the reason I decided to go back to school to get a BBA in Ops Management. That's how I got to the position I'm in today; I started in the quality dept. and now I'm in IT. I love the group I work in now. There's a mutual respect and camaraderie in that team. I work for a very diverse, global company. There's people of every color, culture, race, religion, etc. I love it there. I really hope to retire from this company.
The way some people think is just insane. I am the financial provider in my household and the attitudes my husband and I get because of that is just ridiculous... and I mean from family. It's like, I should force him to work in some shitty steel mill 60+ hours a week just to be the "provider" when I can work 40 hours a week and make more money than he would in that situation. I called my stepdad out because of this attitude. I asked him if he was fine with my mother staying home and taking care of things there. He said he was; I then asked why it mattered which one stayed home. He didn't have an answer and told me to f*ck off. I told him, "That's a nice response. I ask a serious question and you tell me to f*ck off." Of course he hadn't told my mother about it, because she's glad that I've always been overly independent because she wasn't. She's always depended on someone else financially. When I showed her the exchange [via text], she got angry. I told him to butt out and quit making shitty comments in regards to how things are fun in my household considering I have been fending for myself since I was 16. I was PAYING THEM RENT at 16! MY child support check from my dad was paying for groceries for the whole house and I was hardly there! I get they got the shaft from the Detroit News [the reason I had to pony up $100 / month at 16], but doesn't that say something about my character? No one has any right to say anything about how things go in my home and with my family. I have the skills to get paid well; my husband's skills are, quite frankly, outdated / antiquated and therefore, not able to get a well-paying job. I don't have a problem with me being financially responsible. My husband is a great father and husband and he's better than I am at being the stay at home parent than I am. I don't have trouble admitting it. The trouble came when he and I worked together and I had my boss's boss try and tell me about how his wife stayed home when my son was sick and one of us had to pick him up from daycare. I said, "I'm the wife. What are you suggesting?" He didn't think that one through. I knew that I would never make it very far working under him in any capacity.
Sorry... I got a bit off topic with my rant. The main point is, there's a continual injustice in far more ways than what the BLM movement is focusing on, which to me suggests that those other injustices will be pushed aside and forgotten yet again. That's my main "beef" with the BLM movement. Where's the voice for women? Where's the voice for Native Americans? Where's the voice for LEGAL immigrants [no matter where they're from]?
First, let me say what a beautiful, powerful, well-written 'rant'! I was excited and delighted in reading through it!! Secondly, the beauty of BLM as it is right now is that there is a colliding on people groups and "fed-uppers' uniting to make something happen which has not before! BLM is experiencing an advent and confluence of diverse propositions we all are watching. Early on I wrote (somewhere) about the 2017 Women's March and The Parkland School activism needing to add their uplifting voices and influence to this new campaign. In addition, The National Action Network (NAN) is having a march on Washington next month.
It would be a 'high-time' for all well-being organizations for change to blend into one; unfortunately, this virus will require it be in-spirit and distance supporting and activism.
MsAubrey! This all steps off with the removal of this asinine president Trump and his pall over our country. Trump is only going to get worse, because as a 'green tree' meaning during this first term he has ignored every neutral and truthful grouping of experts on a variety of subject matters. As an 'established tree' Trump would, for example, 'hurt' whatever has not been touched and sent careening off in a second set of four years.
It is intolerable. For instance, this virus besetting us such that we can not justify protesting or gathering together as we should under dread of sickness and death, is burgeoning in it first outbreak yet—what happens in January 2021 when this president continues to let it attack the citizenry at will. Protest gatherings will become unworkable and oddly nonsensical. As we will all be in a state of survival.
Trump must go—for the good of protest; for the good of this country.
Your rant is beautiful. You are beautifully articulate and I like reading such works.
Thanks for the compliments! I enjoy reading your posts as well.
My problem is with this upcoming election is that we're being handed really poor choices. Because let's face it, no one in the US government will ever allow a third-party win. Biden is NOT the answer. He is senile. And yes, while Reagan was senile during his second term, he wasn't this far gone when elected for said second term. There was serious consideration in appointing Bush [Reagan's VP] during Reagan's second term because of senility. We don't even know who is being seriously considered for Biden's VP. I guess I should say, who's being groomed and pushed into VP consideration for Biden. Because the sad reality is, whoever Biden [is pushed to appoint] decides as running mate, will be our president if "Biden" is elected. I believe the US Government is so corrupt that they will appoint whoever THEY choose and who they want and has nothing at all to do with our votes [house of reps votes]. Everyone keeps going on and on about how Biden has the leg up in primaries, but so did Hillary. I want a redo of what's being given to us for US Presidential candidates. I want to be able to vote who is worthy of candidacy before it even gets to this point. And let's be real here, we're always given "choices" of whoever has the money to continue. Biden is a puppet, a figurehead and nothing more. What would get everyone in a tizzy is if he appointed Michelle Obama as his running mate. For the record, I was not fond of Barack Obama and it has absolutely nothing to do with the color of his skin, but rather how much more money I have to dole out every damn time myself, one of my kids, or my husband has to go to the hospital for any reason whatsoever. I also have one hell of a time getting my meds that I've been taking for more than 11 years because of policies put in place by Obama. He SCREWED me and my family when it came to taxes, insurance, and education expenses. I make too much money to receive any sort of assistance, but can't afford a $600 / month student loan payment. I'm the sole financial provider and have been for going on 4 years. I have a daughter that's 17. I won't be able to help my 12 year old son with his education. I can't help with education expenses once they graduate, because I have my own $55,000 bill. I only went back to school because I was told that I would never climb the ladder so to speak unless I got a degree for the job I was already performing and wouldn't receive recognition for because I didn't have a degree. All the while, my cousin, in her 30's had a free education, free cell phone, free health care, free food, subsidized housing and she is fully capable of working full time to receive benefits and pay her own way, but under Obama, she got all that stuff for free, so why should she work for it when she doesn't have to? She even said [upon Trump getting into office], "I'm going to lose everything I have right now." I told her to suck it up and get a job. She didn't give a rats ass if I was paying for her to be lazy.
Considering Reagan was an actor and became president, can't we just all write in Morgan Freeman? I'd even watch debates and speeches if Freeman was president!
I'll be real honest... that's my specialty. I don't believe there's any one thing that will change this and certainly not riots or violent protesting... Hell, even peaceful protesting doesn't seem to make a difference today. I've noticed that there are several people out there that are using the BLM movement to just be violent people. I saw a very disturbing video of a woman walking up to a vehicle, grabbing a dog out of said vehicle by the leash / collar and when the owner got out to get her dog back, the dog grabber started swinging that dog by the leash to use it as a weapon against the owner!!! There is NO REASON for anything like that! I've watched people beating each other senseless because they just feel like it, but they do it in the name of the BLM movement. There have been CHILDREN murdered! Martin Luther King would be appalled! He was a great man with a very sane way of thinking; he had good, wholesome beliefs. I will walk tall [even though I'm 4'11"], legally carry my pistol, and defend myself and my family [which includes friends]. I will not justify violence, but I will defend where necessary. I will not justify hatred. I will not justify little kids getting murdered. I will not walk or stand by anyone that tries to justify any of those things.
These injustices will be squashed by future generations WHEN THEY'RE TAUGHT that these injustices exist and shouldn't. These injustices will go away when people are no longer taught to hate or become violent just because they feel somehow butt-hurt by someone(s). These injustices will go away when adults can admit their wrongs and act like adults rather than like pestilent children throwing a tantrum. These injustices will go away when people take personal responsibility for his / her actions. These injustices will go away when people can be honest with each other without being "triggered" by words. These injustices will go away when people can drop the ego and stop acting like they're better than the next person.
I don't think I'm any better or worse than the janitor or the CEO or the person that disagrees with me. I don't have an ego that gets inflated when someone pays me a compliment. I don't need all the money in the world to be happy. I am happy being able to simply pay my bills and have food on the table. I'm happy because I have a loving family. Sure it pisses me off that I've had to work so hard to be where I am when some have it so easy and everything handed to them, but that's not on them. They took advantage of a situation that presented itself. Who wouldn't? I've been faced with plenty of struggles in my life, but being an adult means to work through it and become stronger for it. Sure, I may have scars, but they've been earned. I've learned from everyone I've ever come in contact with in my life. I hope I've taught others too. Hate and violence have no place in my home. I treat my son, my daughter, and my daughter's boyfriend [he lives with us, his 19th birthday is today and I call him the adopted one] all the same way. If my daughter can do the dishes or clean a toilet, so can the boys. If the boys can do yard work or fix a car, so can my daughter. Everyone gets the same treatment in my house. I've watched other households run very differently; they stick to the "social standard" of "traditional gender roles." I don't like it, because that sets the next generation up to be just like the last one. What can I say? My family has always bucked the system [society].
Morgan Freeman is 83. So he can't get this unscripted role or your vote. (Smile.) Again, nice full comment. As for presidents, I am not sure how we go about getting 'Goldilocks' in these trying times. I will say this for Obama. He tried to please. But who can stretch their arms around people who struggle against being reasonably corralled.
Every area of human existence has it counterpoints. Those who protest for the good to the highest degree - the opposite will be true up to the same degrees. They are opportunists available in every crowd. Also, there are agent provocateurs (inciters, some from official government agencies even) that could be present in the protest population.
I love that you are going to be a straightforward commentator here! Let the chips fall where they may.
I love that we can have a civilized discussion!
I crave deep, abiding, truths in discussion no matter the difficulty in finding its way back to a glide path. (Smile.) Some, in my opinion, never get that far with me because they circle their wagons, run up a flag, and begin entrenchment. They never observe that some of my stances are fungible.
The points are presented in a clear, appealing manner. The quality of presentation deserves applause. But
I've been involved in Internet discussion forum a long, long time. (If memory serves, over 40 years. And as time went on, I started seeing certain "Patterns" repeated-- by different persons, on different sites.
And one of them was just that type of pattern.
What is it? Well a person types a very positive sentence that makes a a strong statement (or two as shown above). So far so good.
And then the next sentence...which starts with "But".
And after seeing that numerous times, after a while as soon as you see that "But" you just know what's coming next. its always something thing that negates the previous (positive) sentence.
The purpose? The first sentence is to try to show the speaker is an open-minded positive guy. And then there's the but..
If that's not clear read those sentences again...words of praise..and then there's the "but".
If its still not clear, here are some more example of the pattern (first sentence "proving" the speaker is "a good" guy-- then the "But" which negates it all. A few examples
1. "I'm not saying African Americans are inferior. But....
(Can you guess what comes next? Is it supporting the idea in the first sentence-- of do you immediately know is gonna negate it.
Something like:
"I'm not saying African Americans are inferior. But... they do have a lot of bad habits. (I toned it down, but you get the idea).
2. Mary your dinner last night was exquisite, but.....
Is what comes next going to be further praise (But I've never has a dessert as fantastic as that")? Nope, its more likely to be: something like:
Mary your dinner last night was exquisite, but.....the roast was a little dry.
Oh and the dessert was great...but some people might say it was much too sweet.
I've tried explaining that to people around me. I don't like the ifs, ands [for the most part], or buts. If is a statement of wishful thinking. And is compounding on that if or but most often. And a but is negating the previous statement in most cases just as you said. Every time my 12 year old says, "If... I could..." I tell him, "Yes, and if I had wings I could fly, but do you see that happening"?
Those people are known as "But Bigots". " I'm not a bigot BUT ..."
"If... I could..." I tell him, "Yes, and if I had wings I could fly, but do you see that happening"?
Long ago I heard another response to the "ifs". Sometimes it can be pretty funny. When someone over-uses those "if" phrases here's an interesting reply:
If my grandmother had two handles a wheel and...she's be a wheelbarrow!
it really isn't about racism. While these are important issues, I think we get stuck in the weeds when we discuss them in too much detail before we get on the same page on the overall, big picture issue, racial injustice.
Whoa.. isn't that getting a bit... overly nit picking? Discussing "racial injustice" rather than "racism"? I'm all for nuances-- but isn't that going a tad overboard?
I'd bet that if you had a discussion with the topic "Racial Justice" and then a different discussion on the topic of "Racism"-- the two discussions would be basically the same.
(To put it another way-- if you started by discussing "racism" it would inevitable that "racial justice" would come up).
And vice-versa.
P.S: I see its just as likely to "get stuck in the weeds" when you discuss "racial justice" as when you discuss "racism". IMO the way not to get "stuck in the weeds" is to set your intention to"not to get stuck in the weeds"...also having intelligent, logical, open-minded people involved can't hurt either
Which is one reason so many discussions on so many Social media sites are just so fucking stupid! (Fortunately we don't have that problem here on NT)
P.S.#2: Perhaps a simpler way of saying that: tell the participants at the beginning that we want the discussion to be about "The Big Picture", so let's not start by getting into too many minor details.
I think one reason to frame the conversation as one of racial justice as opposed to racism is to deal with the former as a "where do we go from here?" question. I think that we are all in agreement that racism exists today. If one denies the existence of racism, then one has not been paying attention. Further, this racism expresses itself to a large degree through police interactions with the black community and also through governmental and personal interactions. Therefore it would be best to discuss the way forward from this point. (This is the way that I think Brady was viewing the subject and why he phrased it the way that he did. I do not want, however, to put words into his mouth.)
Does this make sense? Why?
Do you agree? Why?
In part. Actually I think it might depend to a large degree to the type of people you are addressing.
Some people have a tendency to over-analyze sometimes. For many of them, no matter how you phrase it, they might have a tendency to overanalyze. So , for example, no matter how its phrased, they might bogged down over analyzing: We all know it exists-- but to what extent? When did it start? Are most or all minorities subject to racism-- or just some? Or are more than others? Why? In which countries (or states, or towns, etc) is it worse. Why?
Even discussions about whether any of the "Founding fathers" were racist? If so, which ones? Which ones weren't? Why?
And so on...
I liked what you said here:
this racism expresses itself to a large degree through police interactions with the black community and also through governmental and personal interactions. Therefore it would be best to discuss the way forward from this point.
Again, it depends upon the level of awareness of the people in the discussion (on some social media sites you'd probably find some people who dispute that racism really exists, that police actions aren't racist, that blacks are not targeted more than others, etc. And then spend hours arguing over that.
(there is a place for that-- but I prefer to leave that to others.
Personally the way I prefer to approach them-- is not to waste my time with them. (Yes, I'll leave that to others). Although in a site such as NT its inevitable that there's a lot of that.
My tendency (when I;m being serious) it to prefer talking only to people of a much higher level of awareness, in which case we jump right to what you mentioned:
it would be best to discuss the way forward from this point.
P,S: At times it may seem like I'm attacking people, but if I gave that impression I apologize. My my tendency is to attack ideas-- from every side. Even those I agree with.
Why? Because my tendency is accept nothing at face value, but rather challenge everything. (My academic background was very much focused on Science-- which demands proof!)
And I have a background in quality... that requires proof that something has been tested and performed correctly too. Hence me challenging as well. Nothing wrong with asking for proof or clarification.
I've notice a few posters on NT use a variation of the Shewhart/ Deming PDCA cycle - Plan, Do, Check, Act in their postings. The variation is DDDD - Doo Doo, Doo Doo.
We seem to have lucked out here in Thomas' seed .
I like data and proofs too when I can get them.
I will try very hard not to encourage your baser instincts - but I'm weak. Just want you to know.
I'm a big data fan when I can get it.
So many Questions so little time. I will try to answer them when I have more time to type.
Why? Because my tendency is accept nothing at face value, but rather challenge everything. (My academic background was very much focused on Science-- which demands proof!)
I used to say that my motto was-- "Question Everything"!
So would you then also have to question the wisdom of questioning everything?
Then of course you would have to question the ...
Yes.
Actually a while back I came across an interesting Personality Test, Its currently popular amongst many Millenials. (For many people of that age these sorts of things come and go-- different psychology theories, pop Astrology, etc. It turns out its because many are looking for their "Soul Mate". For Mr or Ms Right
Many overly analytical types have found flaws in it. I was skeptical at first, but after studying it a while I was surprised I actually got some insight into myself-- and others.
If anyone is interested, someone posted an excellent series iof articles about it (with some great discussion here on NT). Its Here:
What Personality Type Are You? The MBTI ("Myers Briggs Typology Indicator")
(Part II has all the 16 types listed, with the naes of all the people on NT who took the test and the type they are (in this system). Although I suspect a few people took the test and kept it secret
But if you're interested, read part I first, Take the test if you want, and read the comments.
(My type is ENTP)
INTP - yep - pretty much spot on though I was a little confused that It also said I was most compatible with OX and Dragon...
Then you must be a Betelgeuse...with Cassiopeia rising?
INTP's tend to be "intellectuals". Often very scientific...IIRC Einstein was an INTP (There's a lot of INTP energy in the TV show "The Big Bang Theory", Sheldon is actually a mix of _NT_ types).
INTPs and ENTP's know more information than any other types. (The difference is that INTP investigates something in great depth-- once they have learned just about everything on a subject-- they continue to want to learn more! Go into incredible depth on one subject.
ENTP is similar, except we tend to learn a lot-- but then get bored pretty quickly and jump to learning about a new thing. (I used to think I was an INTP, but realize I'm really an ENTP-- ENTP is the most introverted of the extroverts! We actually tend to alternate-- go through periods of being extremely extraverted-- then go through periods of being extremely introverted ).
There is no exact correspondence between Astrology signs and MBTI types. However the one that's closest in tha ENTP's are very similar in some ways to Gemini.
INTP's are intellectual-- and they are often accused (unfairly) of "having no feelings"
Both are more interested in learning facts than taking action-- they often procrastinate re: doing "practical" yet "boring" tasks-- such as getting laundry done, etc. (INTJ and ENTJ are similar but while they love to learn things-- once they have enuf info to act..they do! They are all about creating results in the world. (ENTP are often leaders-- mid-level management-- they want to create big results! Software engineers tend to be more INTJ than any other type.
And ENTJ and INTJ can be judgemental-- sometimes rigid in their beliefs. (ENTP and INTJ are very open-minded in a way-- if you can present logical proof, they areopen to changing their beliefs-- becausae they are driven by wanting to know the facts-- the truth.
That's what happens whwen you have too many windows open at the same time
Actually when you mentioned that you are a fan of Big data, what came to mind is that based on tha6 alone, you were one of the four "T" types ("thinking") They are ENTP, ENTJ, INTP, INTJ.
Actually ENTP and INTP even more than the other two. For these two its all about collecting information. And lots of it!
INTP in my experience has a passion with discovering very complex problems (the more complex the better!)-- and then working towards solving them. (As I believe I mentioned previously-- Einstein was an INTP. IMO he was very typical of an INTP).
Well OK-- here's another thing that often helps understanding personality types.
That is-- look at a lot of famous people of that type.
So-- here's a list of some famous INTP's -- from various fields.
(Also much more info-- at the top of the page click on links to "Basic Portrait #1 & #2, videos, etc)
If someone is not an INTP, but wants that sort of information about their type, near the top of the page all 16 types are listed-- click on the link to your type.
INFP-T ... I guess it was fairly accurate..
My experience of INFP is that they tend to be very emotionally sensitive, Gentle types...and often very idealistic types who want to change the world!
Yes, very caring.
Also tend to be creative types.
INFP-T ... I guess it was fairly accurate..
Here's the link to famous personalities that are INFPs.
One of my favs is George Orwell ( Author of 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' and 'Animal Farm') . Here's a quote of his from that page (can you relate at all to that sentiment?):
Orwell: "What I have most wanted to do ... is to make political writing into an art. My starting point is always a feeling of partisanship, a sense of injustice."
(Yes, I know-- people often say we look alike! But as far as I know we are not related... )
P.S: That page identifies J.K. Rowling as an INFP. I disagree--- I think she's an INFJ.
There was something similar that we had to do for work and it was pretty accurate. It was to help management the best way to communicate with the employees based on the scores. Mine said I was very analytical and occasionally aggressive.
I thought, "nooooo... really"? 
These sorts of "personality typology" tests are sometimes used by mgmt sand HR depts for various purposes. Often with a new employee to try to see what type ofmjobmthey are best suited for. The tests are often criticized as they are not 100% "accurate" or "scientific". I was skeptical re: MBTI at first, but zi have found it to have value.
Analytical would mean you are one of the four "T" types (Thinking more than feeling).
Not sure which types are more "agressive". Also "aggressive" is often confused with "assertive". (I'm not a real expert in the MBTI-- if I was I could probably tell yopu your type). Aggressive plus Analyticsl probably ESTJ or ENTJ but I could be wrong.
Try this-- a quickie typology indicator. (The "Flow Chart") A fun test. Was intended as humor perhaps satire-- but quite accurate!
Or possibly even an ENTP.
According to the typology quiz:
INTJ
But according to the funny flow chart: ENTJ
I just looked back at that. Lot of good stuff there
Actually when you mentioned that you are a fan of Big data, what came to mind is that based on tha6 alone, you were one of the four "T" types ("thinking") They are ENTP, ENTJ, INTP, INTJ.
Actually ENTP and INTP even more than the other two. For these two its all about collecting information. And lots of it!
INTP in my experience has a passion with discovering very complex problems (the more complex the better!)-- and then working towards solving them. (As I believe I mentioned previously-- Einstein was an INTP. IMO he was very typical of an INTP).
Well OK-- here's another thing that often helps understanding personality types.
That is-- look at a lot of famous people of that type.
So-- here's a list of some famous INTP's -- from various fields.
(Also much more info-- at the top of the page click on links to "Basic Portrait #1 & #2, videos, etc)
If someone is not an INTP, but wants that sort of information about their type, near the top of the page all 16 types are listed-- click on the link to your type.