Trayvon Martin

[Y2HH]

Tangential but again highlights exactly the sort of problems that segregation, whether de facto or de jure, creates.

 

Well, this would happen everywhere, but in most places, the odds of such a "meeting" happening are quite low in comparison to the US.

 

Take Sweden for example, odds of such an occurrence are low since almost everyone is white and blonde. Or Mexico, where most everyone outside of a resort towns is...well...Mexican. But here in the US, these situations are WAY more common than in most areas. It's a problem, but it's a problem we have to deal with FAR more than the rest of the world. And the sheer numbers are going to equate to more of such occurrences.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

Agreed then.

 

I agree that THIS would be racism/prejudice speaking.

 

And this is exactly what Zimmerman did and what jenks said he'd "happily be racist" about. Assuming that simply because he's an unknown black male, he's probably a criminal. He wasn't lurking in alleys, he wasn't walking up to doors and trying the locks, he was walking home talking on the phone to his friend and eating some candy. Even in the best-case scenario, simply because he's black, someone calls the police and he gets stopped and questioned. This is exactly the sort of systemic racism that jenks would deny even exists, yet here he is in this thread saying he'd happily perpetuate it.

[mr_genius]

There's no context that justifies assuming any unknown black male walking down the sidewalk is probably a criminal

 

Well, legally you can assume anything you want. To me it changes when you get a gun, start to menacingly follow/harass at close range, and ultimately get into an altercation (which could have easily been avoided) in which you pull your gun and kill them when things start to go against your favor. I'm less concerned as to if Zimmerman/Martin is a racist.

Edited June 28, 2013 by mr_genius

[Jenksismyhero]

He was eating skittles and drinking iced tea. He was walking home from the store. Because he happened to be black while doing so, someone else assumed that he was probably a criminal and called the police. That same person decided to get out of his car with a gun and follow him. He ended up dead because of this.

 

And yet you're "happily a racist" in this scenario.

 

Yep. Happily. And I would hope all of my neighbors would be equally racist towards anyone that fits the description of teenagers committing crime in my neighborhood that they don't know.

[Y2HH]

And this is exactly what Zimmerman did and what jenks said he'd "happily be racist" about. Assuming that simply because he's an unknown black male, he's probably a criminal. He wasn't lurking in alleys, he wasn't walking up to doors and trying the locks, he was walking home talking on the phone to his friend and eating some candy. Even in the best-case scenario, simply because he's black, someone calls the police and he gets stopped and questioned. This is exactly the sort of systemic racism that jenks would deny even exists, yet here he is in this thread saying he'd happily perpetuate it.

 

This is actually what bothers me about the whole Zimmerman/Martin case, the fact that Martin was on the phone. I mean, how many criminals looking to commit a crime are walking around talking on the phone? I mean, not that I have much experience, but if I was going to try do to something criminal, I wouldn't be looking to make extra noise by gabbing away on the phone while doing it. This small but specific point bothers me.

[StrangeSox]

Well, this would happen everywhere, but in most places, the odds of such a "meeting" happening are quite low in comparison to the US.

 

Take Sweden for example, odds of such an occurrence are low since almost everyone is white and blonde. Or Mexico, where most everyone outside of a resort towns is...well...Mexican. But here in the US, these situations are WAY more common than in most areas. It's a problem, but it's a problem we have to deal with FAR more than the rest of the world. And the sheer numbers are going to equate to more of such occurrences.

Mexico is more ethnically diverse than the US.

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldv...erse-countries/

 

 

But within the US, many communities remain deeply segregated. White flight from cities in the mid-20th century created many almost-all-white suburbs and left many almost-all-minority urban neighborhoods. Chicago is the most segregated city in the country, which is why your earlier Englewood example could work:

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-12...y-neighborhoods

[Y2HH]

Yep. Happily. And I would hope all of my neighbors would be equally racist towards anyone that fits the description of teenagers committing crime in my neighborhood that they don't know.

 

I think his point is that this is much harder to justify when the description fits quite a few of the teenagers living in your area, which is the case here. And I'm inclined to agree in this case.

[StrangeSox]

Yep. Happily. And I would hope all of my neighbors would be equally racist towards anyone that fits the description of teenagers committing crime in my neighborhood that they don't know.

 

The description being "black male," you're embracing and encouraging viewing any unknown black male as a criminal simply because they are a black male. This is racist as f***. Like, short of shouting "WHITE POWER!," you can't get more racist.

[Y2HH]

Mexico is more ethnically diverse than the US.

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldv...erse-countries/

 

 

But within the US, many communities remain deeply segregated. White flight from cities in the mid-20th century created many almost-all-white suburbs and left many almost-all-minority urban neighborhoods. Chicago is the most segregated city in the country, which is why your earlier Englewood example could work:

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-12...y-neighborhoods

 

I don't buy it.

 

Been to Mexico, out of the resorts, and...nope. I think the way they're doing this is by segregating everyone but whites.

 

Example, a white German American is the same as a white Irish American, even though they're really not...at least, they weren't at first. But a Chilean isn't the same as a Mexican, isn't the same as a Venezuelan, even if they're all living in Mexico, despite looking very similar.

 

I've been to quite a few places in Mexico, and to call them diverse is a stretch of epic proportions.

 

And though I've never been there, to say the interior of Africa is ethnically diverse...having a very hard time with this one. Again, I think they're lumping all white races into one in the US, but they're not doing this with other colors of skin.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

This is actually what bothers me about the whole Zimmerman/Martin case, the fact that Martin was on the phone. I mean, how many criminals looking to commit a crime are walking around talking on the phone? I mean, not that I have much experience, but if I was going to try do to something criminal, I wouldn't be looking to make extra noise by gabbing away on the phone while doing it. This small but specific point bothers me.

You probably wouldn't be strolling down the sidewalk just sort of looking around on your way back home, either.

 

But, because he's black, he's probably a criminal in the minds of many.

[mr_genius]

I don't buy it.

 

Me neither. It all goes to their definition of 'diverse'. So is every white American, no matter if they have Irish or Italian or Swedish heritage, classified the same... where as in Mexico someone with heritage from different countries located in South America is considered different? The link probably explains somewhere their formulation as to defining people as different or diverse.

[Jenksismyhero]

The description being "black male," you're embracing and encouraging viewing any unknown black male as a criminal simply because they are a black male. This is racist as f***. Like, short of shouting "WHITE POWER!," you can't get more racist.

 

Well, I'm an equal opportunity racist because that person doesn't have to be black, they can be any color and i'm going to be suspicious of them. Am I going to follow them and try to be a cop about it? Nope. But if Zimmerman wants to be that proactive more power to him. This isn't downtown Chicago. There aren't 10,000 people a minute walking down the street. It's a gated community that had a year long problem with black teenagers committing crime.

[Y2HH]

Me neither. It all goes to their definition of 'diverse'. So is every white American, no matter if they have Irish or Italian or Swedish heritage, classified the same... where as in Mexico someone with heritage from different countries located in South America is considered different? The link probably explains somewhere their formulation as to defining people as different or diverse.

 

That's exactly my thought.

 

Because there is simply no way this is true. They're only getting these results by lumping all whites as exactly the same...which is f***ing ridiculous.

[StrangeSox]

I don't buy it.

 

Been to Mexico, out of the resorts, and no it f***ing is not.

 

I think the way they're doing this is by segregating everyone but whites.

 

Example, a white german american is the same as a white irish american. But a chilian isn't the same as a mexican, isn't the same as a Venezuelan. Despite looking very similar.

 

That chart is bulls***.

 

They're looking at ethnicity here, which would relate back to culture more closely than back to race, though race and culture are strongly correlated geographically. So, ethnically, Chileans and Northern Mexicans and indigenous Mexicans and Guatemalans are probably pretty diverse even if they "look" similar. Whereas a white American of German descent and a white American of Irish descent (both five generations back) are probably indistinguishable culturally, just as a black American of Nigerian descent and a black American of Ivory Coast descent (both five generations back) are probably indistinguishable culturally. Since we frequently lump the huge ethnic and racial diversity of an entire continent into "African," that sometimes gets missed.

[StrangeSox]

That's exactly my thought.

 

Because there is simply no way this is true. They're only getting these results by lumping all whites as exactly the same...which is f***ing ridiculous.

So you've read the referenced study then to conclude this or?

[Y2HH]

They're looking at ethnicity here, which would relate back to culture more closely than back to race, though race and culture are strongly correlated geographically. So, ethnically, Chileans and Northern Mexicans and indigenous Mexicans and Guatemalans are probably pretty diverse even if they "look" similar. Whereas a white American of German descent and a white American of Irish descent (both five generations back) are probably indistinguishable culturally, just as a black American of Nigerian descent and a black American of Ivory Coast descent (both five generations back) are probably indistinguishable culturally. Since we frequently lump the huge ethnic and racial diversity of an entire continent into "African," that sometimes gets missed.

 

But that's comparing Apples to Oranges.

 

Because the US has multiple generations of whites living there, they're being conveniently classified as the same, but when regarding other countries, they're not. Seems like cherry picking data to make a point.

[Y2HH]

So you've read the referenced study then to conclude this or?

 

If they weren't doing this, this chart wouldn't show this.

 

I can tell you right now, I have like 50 different cultures of "white" living on my block alone. From Polish, to Swedish, Italian, etc...with quite diverse backgrounds/cultures and food, etc...

 

You don't have to be a genius or to study up on that chart to see they're lumping all American whites as exactly the same.

 

You even admitted it yourself.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

Well, I'm an equal opportunity racist because that person doesn't have to be black, they can be any color and i'm going to be suspicious of them. Am I going to follow them and try to be a cop about it? Nope. But if Zimmerman wants to be that proactive more power to him. This isn't downtown Chicago. There aren't 10,000 people a minute walking down the street. It's a gated community that had a year long problem with black teenagers committing crime.

 

It's a fenced community with open roads and sidewalks. It's not guarded.

 

They had a problem with some black males breaking into a few homes. This does not justify assuming all black males in the neighborhood are probably criminals. As we've clearly seen, this can lead to judging a completely innocent black teenager and wind up costing him his life.

 

I'm also doubtful that the same scrutiny would apply to any white teenager walking around this neighborhood if some white teenagers were suspected of breaking into some homes. I doubt this based on overwhelming evidence of how our justice system and our society actually function and how many young black males are assumed to be criminals or likely criminals simply because they are young black males.

 

 

[MexSoxFan#1]

I'm happily a racist in that scenario. IIRC, the neighborhood didn't have many blacks in it and Zimmerman had never seen Martin before. You just need to get over your white guilt.

Dude...wtf

[StrangeSox]

But that's comparing Apples to Oranges.

 

Because the US has multiple generations of whites living there, they're being conveniently classified as the same, but when regarding other countries, they're not. Seems like cherry picking data to make a point.

 

It's just looking at ethnicity. I don't know what sort of bias or motivation you're assigning the research here where they'd be skewing the data, intentionally or subconsciously, to get some desired result.

 

If (some) whites are ethnically non-diverse because they've developed their own white American culture over several generations, why shouldn't that be reflected? Again, this wasn't looking at race but ethnicity.

 

from the article:

Another caveat is that people in different countries might have different bars for what constitutes a distinct ethnicity. These data, then, could be said to measure the perception of ethnic diversity more than the diversity itself; given that ethnicity is a social construct, though those two metrics are not necessarily as distinct as one might think. Finally, as the paper notes, “It would be wrong to interpret our ethnicity variable as reflecting racial characteristics alone.” Ethnicity might partially coincide with race, but they’re not the same thing.

 

You can't judge ethnicity based on physical appearance.

 

here's a key point from the study:

In general, it does not matter for our purposes whether ethnic differences reflect physical attributes of groups (skin color, facial features) or long-lasting social conventions (language, marriage within the group, cultural norms) or simple social definition (self-identification, identification by outsiders). When people persistently identify with a particular group, they form potential interest groups that can be manipulated by political leaders, who often choose to mobilize some coalition of ethnic groups (“us”) to the exclusion of others (“them”). Politicians also sometimes can mobilize support by singling out some groups for persecution, where hatred of the minority group is complementary to some policy the politician wishes to pursue.

 

Ethnicity, like race, is a social construct. How you self-identify and how you perceive others is a key component of it. If you view your Polish neighbors as different from you ethnically and you were part of this study, the results would reflect that. I don't view my wife's Italian family and my Irish-German family as ethnically different because they're all 3rd+ generation immigrants and we all grew up within probably 50 miles of each other near Chicago.

 

wikipedia tabulates the research here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...al.27s_analysis

 

America remains a fairly ethnically diverse country, but we're a country of assimilation for the most part. And you're dead-on about Sweden being damn near perfectly homogeneous.

Edited June 28, 2013 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

I prefer being prejudicial over having crime continue in my neighborhood, so whatever. Get off my lawn.

 

Clearly the community wasn't happy with the police or their efforts to curb the problem. Zimmerman went overboard, I've already admitted that many times throughout this thread, but I don't think him looking at Martin and thinking "hey, I wonder what he's up to, he's probably up to no good" is automatically racist and if it is racist then whatever, I don't think that's wrong. He could have been hispanic, he could have been asian, he could have been white - if he fits the description of whoever was committing the crimes it's smart to be suspicious given his neighborhood. Calling the cops was probably excessive, as was tailing him. I wouldn't have done that, but I don't want to be involved as much as Zimmerman wanted to be involved. Maybe if enough crime was happening in my neighborhood I would.

 

[Y2HH]

It's just looking at ethnicity. I don't know what sort of bias or motivation you're assigning the research here where they'd be skewing the data, intentionally or subconsciously, to get some desired result.

 

If (some) whites are ethnically non-diverse because they've developed their own white American culture over several generations, why shouldn't that be reflected? Again, this wasn't looking at race but ethnicity.

 

from the article:

 

 

You can't judge ethnicity based on physical appearance.

 

here's a key point from the study:

 

 

Ethnicity, like race, is a social construct. How you self-identify and how you perceive others is a key component of it. If you view your Polish neighbors as different from you ethnically and you were part of this study, the results would reflect that. I don't view my wife's Italian family and my Irish-German family as ethnically different because they're all 3rd+ generation immigrants and we all grew up within probably 50 miles of each other near Chicago.

 

wikipedia tabulates the research here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...al.27s_analysis

 

America remains a fairly ethnically diverse country, but we're a country of assimilation for the most part. And you're dead-on about Sweden being damn near perfectly homogeneous.

 

I see what you're saying. I just think that such a chart doesn't adequately reflect a key point you made in that the US is a country of assimilation (for the most part), where others are not, and go out of their way to avoid such assimilation. So of course, such a reflection of Mexico would make it appear to be more diverse, but I don't think it truly is. It's only more diverse because we've assimilated to the American way, where those living there refuse to do so, regardless of how long they've lived there.

[StrangeSox]

I prefer being prejudicial over having crime continue in my neighborhood, so whatever. Get off my lawn.

 

You prefer being racist and making really, really s***ty decisions based on your racism that lead to innocent people being harassed by the police or, in this case, shot dead. Zimmerman's enthusiastic racism, which you happily embrace, did not catch the "f***ing punks," as he put it, who had committed a few break-ins in previous months.

 

He could have been hispanic, he could have been asian, he could have been white - if he fits the description of whoever was committing the crimes it's smart to be suspicious given his neighborhood. Calling the cops was probably excessive, as was tailing him. I wouldn't have done that, but I don't want to be involved as much as Zimmerman wanted to be involved. Maybe if enough crime was happening in my neighborhood I would.

 

But, see, based on how things actually happen in reality, people are much, much quicker to jump to broad racist assumptions about a random black person probably being a criminal than they are about a random white or asian person. They're much, much quicker to jump to a conclusion that a random hispanic person is probably an illegal than a random white immigrant. It's racist.

 

Clearly the community wasn't happy with the police or their efforts to curb the problem. Zimmerman went overboard, I've already admitted that many times throughout this thread, but I don't think him looking at Martin and thinking "hey, I wonder what he's up to, he's probably up to no good" is automatically racist and if it is racist then whatever, I don't think that's wrong.

 

And this is where my conversation with you ends, where you explicitly say that, even if this is racist, it's not wrong. In a case where Zimmerman's racism winds up in an innocent kid being shot to death, you still think his racism was a good thing, something you would hope that your whole community would embrace.

[StrangeSox]

I see what you're saying. I just think that such a chart doesn't adequately reflect a key point you made in that the US is a country of assimilation (for the most part), where others are not, and go out of their way to avoid such assimilation. So of course, such a reflection of Mexico would make it appear to be more diverse, but I don't think it truly is. It's only more diverse because we've assimilated to the American way, where those living there refuse to do so, regardless of how long they've lived there.

 

If people have ethnically assimilated into American culture, than they're not ethnically diverse. That's just tautological, really the definition of assimilation. And again, this is ethnicity, not race. You could be ethnically the same but racially different or vice-versa. First-generation immigrants living in Chinatown and reading Chinese newspapers everyday are ethnically and racially diverse from you and me. Third-generation Chinese immigrant who grew up in Plainfield and doesn't speak a lick of Chinese is racially different but probably ethnically the same as his peers.

 

In Mexico I don't think it makes sense to talk about people "refusing" to assimilate. I'm not exactly up on my ethnic Mexican history, but maybe there's just never been a dominant ethnicity to assimilate to. If various ethnic groups haven't really assimilated, then they really are more diverse than groups that have. I don't see why this is controversial?

 

Maybe there's some ambiguity between "ethnicity" and "culture" or "subculture." My subculture in Chicago suburbia is different from the subculture in Englewood is different from the subculture in Atlanta is different from the subculture in rural Arkansas etc. I don't know, personally, that I'd say I was ethnically different from any of those other groups, but I might be inclined to say I was culturally different.

[Jenksismyhero]

You prefer being racist and making really, really s***ty decisions based on your racism that lead to innocent people being harassed by the police or, in this case, shot dead. Zimmerman's enthusiastic racism, which you happily embrace, did not catch the "f***ing punks," as he put it, who had committed a few break-ins in previous months.

 

 

 

But, see, based on how things actually happen in reality, people are much, much quicker to jump to broad racist assumptions about a random black person probably being a criminal than they are about a random white or asian person. They're much, much quicker to jump to a conclusion that a random hispanic person is probably an illegal than a random white immigrant. It's racist.

 

 

And this is where my conversation with you ends, where you explicitly say that, even if this is racist, it's not wrong. In a case where Zimmerman's racism winds up in an innocent kid being shot to death, you still think his racism was a good thing, something you would hope that your whole community would embrace.

 

Clearly I don't think it's racist. If YOU want to label it as racist, that's what I don't care about nor do I agree with you that it's wrong.

 

And the end result had nothing to do with Zimmerman calling the cops and tailing Martin. It could have ended a thousand different ways after that "racist" move.

 

Edit: your argument would make more sense to me if no crime was being committed in that neighborhood and Zimmerman saw a black kid and assumed he was up to no good simply because he's a black kid and he thought black kids always commit crime. But that's not the context here, which you continue to ignore. The context absolutely matters. If you live in a community where you have to fear criminals and have to take the extra step of protecting yourself then you're going to naturally seek out and be suspicious of those people that fit the description of those criminals. Especially if you're the type to become a neighborhood watch leader and have spoken to (and been rebuffed by) the cops on several occasions.

 

You can continue to pretend like everyone has to be Mr. Perfect about how they view people no matter the context, but that's not the real world. The real world is if you get sick and tired of criminals taking over your community you're going to do all you can to fix that problem. If you end up offending a white guy who lives in Illinois who talks on the internet all day, so be it. I don't think it was racist, nor do I think Zimmerman THINKING that way is wrong. Taking the extra step of calling the cops? Yeah, I could maybe see that as being wrong. Simply tailing the guy to see what he's doing? No, definitely not. Starting an altercation? Obviously, yes.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Jenksismybitch