You know what ought to sway you, Gunfighter? The thousands of black people out marching on the streets demanding they be treated like human beings, in 2014.

The word "racist" doesn't mean anything anymore, but I can tell you for sure that if you are not with this black folks, you are against them.

It's sad that the things Malcolm X said about this shit 50 years ago are exactly as relevant as when he said them. You would think we would have advanced maybe even just a hair. Apparently not.

Gunfighter, while a disproportionate number of violent crimes are likely committed by black people, it does not excuse institutional racism. Also, black people are more likely to be locked up for committing crimes than white people (correctly and wrongfully). And, finally, it is a consequence of widespread racism that blacks are overrepresented in the criminal classes.

I agree with phil that there is no excuse for institutional racism, but Gunfighter does have a valid point in that African Americans are more likely to commit crimes. But what also isn't being looked at is that African Americans have a much greater chance to live below the poverty line than any other race. (http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0713.pdf)

http://www.awesomelyluvvie.com/2014/12/stages-injustice-against-black-people.html

If you can improve inner city education systems and reduce the racial divide below the poverty line then the ratio of African American to White criminals decreases. Now let me say this, I know a lot of police officers who work in urban areas and I wouldn't consider any of them to be racists, but from their perspective the vast majority of criminals who they encounter are African American, and this is why some officers are more inclined to stop African Americans. I'm not saying this is right, but from a practical standpoint I believe the best long term solution to the problem is to reduce the poverty level in the African American community, so that less members of that community turn to crime (there is a direct correlation between living below the poverty level and criminal activity)

Blacks are driven to crime because institutional racism prevents a large portion of them from doing anything with their lives otherwise. It's circular, too, because those high crime rates further produce instances of institutional racism, so you can't really point to either as a causation of another today. However, historically, institutional racism which drove segregation (which is still very much alive) came first, so suggesting that blacks are inherenty more likely to commit crimes as opposed to more likely to commit crimes due to a number of socioeconomic restrictions placed on them due to institutional racism is racism in itself.

I agree with most of what you just said, but how is segregation still alive? There are plenty of successful blacks out there, and to say that we've made NO PROGRESS since segregation ended just isn't true.

Haha

Idealistic young people who think they know everything. Actually pretty funny. While what Bo said is part of the truth it's still only part.

@thucy the reason we haven't moved on since Malcolm is people are encouraged to shun his message and focus only on the more conservative mlk. People were encouraged to believe it was all mlk who got things done, that his way is the best, and that his achievements were almost all we needed. People should realise Malcolm had a LOT of wisdom

Thdfeance, visit any big city and tell me we aren't still segregated. Chiacgo is probably the worst.

"He's asking people not to talk about them. This only serves to perpetuate them."

No he's not. You guys are fabricating this charge out of thin air. In no charitable reading of Tolstoy's post does he say "Don't talk about racism guys" or anything of the sort.

If being more concerned about police brutality than racism is racist, and worthy of smears like "shitstain" and "clueless as all fucking hell," you guys have lost me. End of story. With supposed "friends" against the monstrosity of the police state as these, who needs enemies?

I don't necessarily agree with Joesam that race itself is "a red herring to distract and divide us" with regard to resisting/opposing the police state - but if it spawns discussions like these, where likeminded people are still at one another's throats, it's hard to argue otherwise.

I'm not saying there aren't problems, I'm saying that poverty leads to an increase in criminal activity, and there are a disproportionate number of Black people living below the poverty line when compared to other racial groups. When I think of segregation, I think of intentionally separating races. The statistics are definitely a result of segregation, and initiatives need to be taken to solve that, but I don't think there are policies in place (that I know of) that keep segregation alive. I think police departments need reform, and I'm not saying that they aren't a part of the problem at all, but hands down the best way to improve situations like this in the long term is to fight poverty and improve inner city education systems, not bash the police departments.

The US government killed Martin Luther King. He was radical enough. Just no one remembers that.

If you don't think segregation is real, google redlining

Imagine a few good hearted Germans in the 30s arguing about whether the power of the government was being used against Jews or just against everyone. Again, you can be angry about both. Black people more than white people are our allies against our oppressive government, because white people more than black people benefit from the same oppression. If this is something you'd like to dispute, do it on your own time. We don't have time for this shit anymore

@ thdfrance

That's where I was going. I would argue that black woes in general (higher crime rates, drug use, number below poverty line, incarceration rate, violence rate, teen pregnancies, etc...) are a lingering effect of *past* institutional racism. Is the institution racist these days? No, of course not. Is the black population still suffering from previous generations of racism? Yes, of course. It could be said with quite a bit of truth that the average black family is still suffering from the after-effects of being held down for generations. Time heals all wounds. Within a few decades, we'll see only small disparities between blacks and whites in terms of socioeconomic status, even in the absence of affirmative action.

In the meantime, it is imperative that the media stops promoting an "I'm a victim because I'm black" attitude and also, what I'll refer to as a "Fuck the police" thug culture.

@ Thucy

"You know what ought to sway you, Gunfighter? The thousands of black people out marching on the streets demanding they be treated like human beings, in 2014."

I am unswayed. I am not impressed by the puppets/minions of an overwhelmingly white liberal ivory tower elite who have been brainwashed into thinking that everything is racist and that laws do not matter.

@thucy um... MLK Sr. died of a heart attack and MLK Jr. was killed by James Earl Ray, there is a conspiracy but there is nothing official. please dont post theories as if they were fact because it may confuse some less informed members. I;m not saying it isn't true, i'm just saying that it is not a 100% verified fact

The protestors in New York are brainwashed by the ivory tower elite? Lol

@ Thucy

Don't be coy, and don't try and claim that the mass media race-baiting machine isn't operating at full operational capacity.

"Mass-media race baiting machine"

This is why you are being called a white supremacist - this right here. We know who you are and what you believe, you can't play the fool

Conflict sells airtime. This simple fact doesn't make me a white supremacist.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/09/us/memphis-jury-sees-conspiracy-in-martin-luther-king-s-killing.html

The US government was literally convicted of conspiring to kill MLK.

Eh, big deal. They've done a lot worse. They killed JFK, too.

Time to protest the white cop who killed a black guy and didn't even get put on trial

No not that one, the other one
No the other
Nooooo the other one

@ bo_sox48

You do know that it is possible to kill someone without committing a crime?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide#Examples_of_justifiable_homicide_laws_in_the_United_States

The grand juries did not indict in their respective cases because the prosecution had no chance of success. That's the point of a grand jury; to determine if the prosecution has sufficient evidence to bring the case to trial. In the Garner case, IMHO the grand jury shit the bed. However, the Brown grand jury did NOT shit the bed.

You're right. The prosecution did. That isn't the point and you know that.

Dude, the witnesses changed their stories and would have crumbled under even elementary cross-examination by a high-school mock trial team. Furthermore, the physical evidence completely corroborated Officer Wilson's account.

Can anyone provide me even a hypothetical potential example of why the Eric Garner jury's failure to indict was a fair decision? I can't come up with anything, it seems like no one can. Even George W Bush questioned their decision.