LogFAQs > #885671446

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	white privilege does not mean all white people are better off than everyone else
Balrog0 08/29/17 4:41:57 PM #113:	The Admiral posted... I'm asking for a high bar before accepting claims of institutional racism. And so should everyone. Blaming a disparity on racism when it's not the true cause is not simply useless, it's counter-productive. I agree with this statement, but apparently disagree about the strength of the evidence for systemic racism The Admiral posted... Also, there is nothing wrong with expecting a high bar and detailed analysis for public policies. I'm not expecting you or me to do that, but there are thousands of well-educated 20-somethings on the government payroll who should be doing these kinds of analyses before we make sweeping policy changes that could have unforeseen consequences. In fact, a lack of this kind of pre-analysis has been a major contributor to racial disparities in policy outcomes in some cases (stop-and-frisk probably being the most heated example). I agree with that, too. BUT it doesn't really answer my question. As a matter of fact, we don't live in a world where the majority of people demand this kind of scrutiny for public policies, generally. And when we actually enact policies that demand scrutiny through legislation, I don't think the result we get is anything like consensus. The most recent and easy example of this is the kerfuffle over the minimum wage debate in Seattle, which is why I mentioned it. Now, to your credit, I don't think you were one of the people who entered one of my many topics about that, saw a result they liked (the higher minimum wage was bad), and then said something along the lines of, "obviously a higher minimum wage had that impact!" But there are people on "your side" who did do that, even though the preponderance of research should tell you to take that result much more skeptically (and to be generally supportive of a gradually increasing minimum wage). So it's a legitimate question; where do you draw the line? I DO think I've seen you argue something along the lines that the disparity between whites and blacks with respect to things like arrest rates and sentencing is due to the different behaviors of blacks and whites when interacting with the police, for instance, when presented with potential evidence of discrimination based on outcomes there. Is that really a realistic thing to study? And if we did find that was true, wouldn't we just continue to argue about whether the response by the criminal justice system was justified, or still discriminatory? just as a caveat, many people have a broader view of racism than I do, I'm only arguing for myself --- He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:885671446] in white priv... [t:75719976]...</cite> <quote><cite>The Admiral posted...</cite> <quote>I'm asking for a high bar before accepting claims of institutional racism. And so should everyone. Blaming a disparity on racism when it's not the true cause is not simply useless, it's counter-productive. </quote> I agree with this statement, but apparently disagree about the strength of the evidence for systemic racism <cite>The Admiral posted...</cite> <quote>Also, there is nothing wrong with expecting a high bar and detailed analysis for public policies. I'm not expecting you or me to do that, but there are thousands of well-educated 20-somethings on the government payroll who should be doing these kinds of analyses before we make sweeping policy changes that could have unforeseen consequences. In fact, a lack of this kind of pre-analysis has been a major contributor to racial disparities in policy outcomes in some cases (stop-and-frisk probably being the most heated example).</quote> I agree with that, too. BUT it doesn't really answer my question. As a matter of fact, we don't live in a world where the majority of people demand this kind of scrutiny for public policies, generally. And when we actually enact policies that demand scrutiny through legislation, I don't think the result we get is anything like consensus. The most recent and easy example of this is the kerfuffle over the minimum wage debate in Seattle, which is why I mentioned it. Now, to your credit, I don't think you were one of the people who entered one of my many topics about that, saw a result they liked (the higher minimum wage was bad), and then said something along the lines of, "obviously a higher minimum wage had that impact!" But there are people on "your side" who did do that, even though the preponderance of research should tell you to take that result much more skeptically (and to be generally supportive of a gradually increasing minimum wage). So it's a legitimate question; where do you draw the line? I DO think I've seen you argue something along the lines that the disparity between whites and blacks with respect to things like arrest rates and sentencing is due to the different behaviors of blacks and whites when interacting with the police, for instance, when presented with potential evidence of discrimination based on outcomes there. Is that really a realistic thing to study? And if we did find that was true, wouldn't we just continue to argue about whether the response by the criminal justice system was justified, or still discriminatory? just as a caveat, many people have a broader view of racism than I do, I'm only arguing for myself --- He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1