RE: Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?
August 22, 2018 at 6:49 pm
(This post was last modified: August 22, 2018 at 7:06 pm by bennyboy.)
Yeah, I caught this last night when I googled the demographics, but I was too tired to go edit.
Georgia wasn't my best bet. I should have said Mississippi, and then Idaho because it's so predominantly white. That's just me being Canadian and not knowing the states that well. You should be able to see that, I hope. In a way, I'm glad I didn't edit it, because I've assumed for a while that there were things eating at you, something really compelling to make you hold the position you do, and now it's crystal clear-- a real interest in justice, and a real offense at the total lack of it. You've done a lot of shit-slinging, but I'd much prefer it when you take an actual position.
So, egg on my face for ignorantly picking a poor example, but clarity in the debate, and a pretty nice chance for you to vent and be all kinds of right. There's no point in the above that I'd want to stand against.
Racism is clearly a problem, and solving is clearly desirable. That's partly because black kids, if they grow up in a more privileged environment, can grow up to be teachers, doctors and others who contribute. Taking away baby daddies on trumped-up charges is so obviously going to re-create the cycle, that one wonders if that isn't completely deliberate-- making sure children don't have parents is a good way to make sure they are never educated enough to be an effective political force.
That being said (you knew it was coming!), my suggestion is that work programs provide jobs selectively based on income, and in areas or districts worst off. If this does not end up greatly benefiting black people on average, then it's because the metric for selecting the workers is unfair: that's a problem with the design of the program.
I'd also suggest that prisoners be released based on anything BUT their racial profile, despite so many black people being detained. That's because if you release them based on any other metric, those injustices unravel-- the asymmetry in putting them into prison should make them the first out. For example, the first thing you do is release everyone ever imprisoned on simple marijuana possession charges, in particular when those charges represented a third-strike scenario. A lot of those guys would be white, but a huge proportion of them would be black. You don't have to make it ABOUT their blackness, or call this the Release Unfairly Imprisoned Black Men Initiative, for good policies to have that effect anyway.
But the PC warrior, while it's fun to be the hero, isn't going to work-- or at least, I don't think it will work soon enough for America. After all the clearly correct things you just ranted about, divisive demographics are STILL divisive. Unless you intend to forcibly wrest power from those have-alls in Georgia (another option I've already mentioned in this thread, btw), then the question is-- what's the best way to achieve your goal?
Do you even have an answer to that question? Here we have a scenario in which you are clearly right, and in which identity demographics are clearly used in order to selectively target black people. This is your moment-- what PC Left policies would you make, based explicitly on demographic minorities (as opposed to just income, severity of crimes committed, etc.)? What laws do you make?
The kneejerk reaction is something like, "Make it a federal crime to discriminate in criminal proceedings based on race, and throw those white motherfuckers in jail. Let them see how long they survive when the guys they put in jail get their fucking hands on them!" But how, actually, does one go about doing this? By tribunal? How do you establish who gets to make these calls?
Georgia wasn't my best bet. I should have said Mississippi, and then Idaho because it's so predominantly white. That's just me being Canadian and not knowing the states that well. You should be able to see that, I hope. In a way, I'm glad I didn't edit it, because I've assumed for a while that there were things eating at you, something really compelling to make you hold the position you do, and now it's crystal clear-- a real interest in justice, and a real offense at the total lack of it. You've done a lot of shit-slinging, but I'd much prefer it when you take an actual position.
So, egg on my face for ignorantly picking a poor example, but clarity in the debate, and a pretty nice chance for you to vent and be all kinds of right. There's no point in the above that I'd want to stand against.
Racism is clearly a problem, and solving is clearly desirable. That's partly because black kids, if they grow up in a more privileged environment, can grow up to be teachers, doctors and others who contribute. Taking away baby daddies on trumped-up charges is so obviously going to re-create the cycle, that one wonders if that isn't completely deliberate-- making sure children don't have parents is a good way to make sure they are never educated enough to be an effective political force.
That being said (you knew it was coming!), my suggestion is that work programs provide jobs selectively based on income, and in areas or districts worst off. If this does not end up greatly benefiting black people on average, then it's because the metric for selecting the workers is unfair: that's a problem with the design of the program.
I'd also suggest that prisoners be released based on anything BUT their racial profile, despite so many black people being detained. That's because if you release them based on any other metric, those injustices unravel-- the asymmetry in putting them into prison should make them the first out. For example, the first thing you do is release everyone ever imprisoned on simple marijuana possession charges, in particular when those charges represented a third-strike scenario. A lot of those guys would be white, but a huge proportion of them would be black. You don't have to make it ABOUT their blackness, or call this the Release Unfairly Imprisoned Black Men Initiative, for good policies to have that effect anyway.
But the PC warrior, while it's fun to be the hero, isn't going to work-- or at least, I don't think it will work soon enough for America. After all the clearly correct things you just ranted about, divisive demographics are STILL divisive. Unless you intend to forcibly wrest power from those have-alls in Georgia (another option I've already mentioned in this thread, btw), then the question is-- what's the best way to achieve your goal?
Do you even have an answer to that question? Here we have a scenario in which you are clearly right, and in which identity demographics are clearly used in order to selectively target black people. This is your moment-- what PC Left policies would you make, based explicitly on demographic minorities (as opposed to just income, severity of crimes committed, etc.)? What laws do you make?
The kneejerk reaction is something like, "Make it a federal crime to discriminate in criminal proceedings based on race, and throw those white motherfuckers in jail. Let them see how long they survive when the guys they put in jail get their fucking hands on them!" But how, actually, does one go about doing this? By tribunal? How do you establish who gets to make these calls?
