DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 65 of 65, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/28/2014 11:43:17 PM · #51
Two video of guys carrying guns (but not pointing them at anyone), acting irrationally and failing to comply with police officer's lawful orders.

One guy has an assault rifle and the police spend a quarter hour talking with him before arresting him. He was not charged and his rifle was returned to him the next day. Video

One guy has a pistol and the time between the police opening the doors of their cruiser and firing ten shots into him (3 shots into his prone body) was 20 seconds. Video

Before you watch the videos, guess which guy with a gun was white and which guy was black.
08/28/2014 11:57:35 PM · #52
<stirring the pot, a bit>

So, where does Dillon Taylor fit into this discussion?

AND did you know who he was without googling his name?

AND, if you didn't know who he was, why did you not know?
08/29/2014 12:04:34 AM · #53
Originally posted by BrennanOB:

Before you watch the videos, guess which guy with a gun was white and which guy was black.

Powell ("the black guy") was carrying a knife, not a gun...
08/29/2014 12:07:38 AM · #54
Originally posted by karmat:

<stirring the pot, a bit>

So, where does Dillon Taylor fit into this discussion?

AND did you know who he was without googling his name?

AND, if you didn't know who he was, why did you not know?


Glad you posted it. I considered it earlier, but figured I'd be better off not posting that one.

FWIW, this is not unusual. Hell, look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism. Only two of a thousand examples of this, but apparently it's ok?
08/29/2014 12:36:40 AM · #55
Originally posted by Cory:

Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?
08/29/2014 01:18:34 AM · #56
Originally posted by posthumous:

I sat through the whole long video that heavyj posted. He took Zimmerman's testimony as fact and was extremely vague about the physical evidence and witness statements that supported it. Then he goes off on a long rant about *spanking* of all things.

Finally, he says we have to unite and fight the real power, like the fascist weapons of the police, but then when Michael Brown is killed by a policeman, he lumps it together with the Trayvon Martin case.

He also calls the president "B. Hussein Obama."

Not my idea of a rational philosopher.


Did we watch the same video? From what I gathered, he took both physical and witness statements into account that corroborated what Zimmerman said.

As far as the spanking goes, just from my own experience, teaching young kids in Japan, kids who get spanked or are punished for misbehaving are FAR more likely to show their peers and elders more respect as they grow up. It use to be Japanese father's that did the disciplining but that's slowly transitioned into the mothers job. In the years since, some mothers have had a tougher time doing it. I have kids talking back to their mothers like they were their house slaves, and the mothers' bowing down to them. The I have kids who, once out of line, they know it's game over. And now, after almost 15 years of teaching, I've seen them grow up. While none of them have become BAD people, the ones who are less likely to listen, more likely to not care about the rules etc are the ones who grew up without discipline.

Now, those are my experiences here in Japan, and also from growing up in a house where the rules were set by the parents. I think this does play an important role in how we grow up. I'm not saying that kids who aren't properly disciplined will grow up to be thugs, and kids who were properly disciplined will be wonderful people, but there is a correlation to a certain degree wouldn't you say.

And calling the president by his name, although not how others would call him, doesn't quite mean much unless you're intent is to associated him with something negative by doing so. People who call me by my last name rather than my first, just because that's how they call their friends is fine with me. However, if it's to be mean by associating me with the golden arches in some way to cause me harm (Kids did this in elementary school) that's different.
08/29/2014 02:18:13 AM · #57
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Cory:

Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?


And that is the argument that is most commonly made. I'm just fairly skeptical that we can get rid of racism when we live in a world where there are laws based on race. And interesting conundrum don't you think?
08/29/2014 05:46:52 AM · #58
Originally posted by Cory:



This is a tired line for me - I\'m sorry, but damnit, you\'ve gotta own it man, you\'ve gotta take responsibility man. I mean, really, I had a childhood that arguably should have doomed me to prison, failure, etc. I made a choice when I was 25 to rise above all of that and to change my life.. I see many parallels between how I felt then and what you\'ve written here - I felt my situation was the product of other people\'s actions and choices, which to a degree, I was right. However, in the end, I had to choose what I wanted for myself, and I think much the same is true of this situation. Of course there are those who ARE doing this, the problem is really the enablers and apologists who perpetuate the exact same explanation that you\'ve just given me.


I get it\'s a tired line for you and others, but how can you possibly know what the effect of years of slavery and racism are? There is no parallel in history that I can think of - a race of people transported across the world and subjugated, brutalized, raped, tortured and murdered over a time span approaching 400 years. And then, after gaining liberty, existed in a grossly unfair, biased and prejudiced society. If you said to me that similar happened to, say, the Norwegians and look how they\'ve recovered without any scars or ill-effects I would say you have a point. The closest thing we have is perhaps the treatment of Jews in the last century, and everything about the Jewish experience and attitude today is coloured by the experience of the holocaust, yet you say that black people should effectively \'get over it\'.

Your own experience cannot, with all due respect, be compared to the black experience in the US. You belong to the most priveleged class there is - white and male. I would further make this point - the vast majority of black people are not criminals. They have jobs (even though the job market has been historically skewed against them) they pay taxes (even though paying their tax dollars does not afford them equal treatment under the law) they are in the military and fight and die for the US (even though historically they had to fight in segregated units because white people didn\'t want to be near them) they work incredibly hard to further their prospects through education (even when 60 years ago they had to defeat police brutality and institutional aparthied to gain access to that education).

So, if you and I agree that a lot of people (black and white) can try and succeed in getting themselves out of a life of crime and violence then doesn\'t it also follow that the people who start further at the back are going to have a higher level of failures?

The enablers and apologists are also the people who have fought the hardest to make change. Because you recognise a problem doesn\'t mean you give into it.

I truly apologize if what I say is offensive to you, as that is not at all my intent here, but while I cannot deny that all you\'ve said is true, I also cannot accept what you\'ve said as an acceptable state of affairs, nor as a reason for this to continue into the future. Surely you can agree with that? (I hope?)

No apology necessary, I\'m not at all offended. I think you say what you know and what you see. The state of affairs is indeed not acceptable but I have optimism that people can always improve the human condition and deal with others fairly and justly. It took hundreds of years, the actions of intelligent, determined people, the huge resources of one of the most powerful countries there have ever been to subjugate another race, so it will take time and effort to undo, but that\'s not to say it can\'t or won\'t be done.


Not really. I actually end up wondering why the Irish didn\'t end up more like the blacks. Aside from that, I\'m left wondering why people feel that historical wrongs against their ancestors is acceptable as a justification for their mistreatment of others in the present. Frankly, I\'ve suffered VERY little aggression from darker individuals, mostly I find my interactions with black folks to be downright pleasant and enjoyable. Statistics are still valid though, even in the face of my personal experience. And for what it\'s worth, I\'m one of three white people that I know of in my neighborhood. There really are more black families on my block than white.


The Irish were able to keep their language, religion, community, freedom of travel, homeland, freedom to marry, earn wages (however small) etc etc. The Irish experience is not comparable with the slavery experience. The statistics you allude to can\'t be viewed in isolation, others include higher rate of black incarceration for a first offence compared to white; longer sentences for similar offences compared to white; more custodial sentences for similar offences compared to white; more blacks on death row for similar offences committed by whites; less tax dollars spent on education in black communities than white; less tax dollars spent on health care in black communities compared to white; lower levels of education held by whites doing similar jobs to blacks. etc etc


Well, I don\'t quite know what more I could do here, it\'s not like I actually avoid black people in any way, of course, I\'m not the sort that really worries about trouble too much either, being that I\'m comfortable in sketchy situations. It\'s nothing that I\'ve experienced personally for the most part (small things, mostly easily diffused and non-issues), it\'s much more a simple observation that there clearly is more going on here than many would like to admit. In the end, I wonder how much your response to this changes knowing that I don\'t live in a white suburb, and that I don\'t actually fear black people, but do instead simply keep my eyes open just a bit wider when around unknown black people, on the dual basis that there is an increased statistical likelihood of violence, and the knowledge that white folks aren\'t the only racists out there.


The critical thing here is that you keep your eyes a bit wider open around black people - that\'s fair enough. I do too, around certain places and people, but is \'black\' here just a shorthand for maybe poor, maybe resentful, maybe disadvantaged, maybe angry? What do you mean by \'more going on here than many would admit\'? Do you think that black people are predisposed towards crime and violence? Do you think they are inherently lazier than white people? Less intelligent? less trustworthy? Or do you think that for the most part the actions and attitudes of black people are a product of their environments and experiences?

I would agree that many black people could and should do more, could and should try harder. I despair that the black community is not more united. That they don\'t use their financial power to force change (a la the Jews) That they are so easily bought out and sold out (I can\'t deny that african slaves were sold by their own, that informants destroyed the radical black consciousness movement in the 60s) but unless you\'ve lived it you can\'t really point a finger.

Throwing your lot in with all of the immigrants in England is probably a pretty horrible idea, given that the Muslim variety have been recently seen to bomb subways, stab people in the street in broad daylight, and are actively forcefully implementing sharia law in parts of Britain. They are in fact quite troublesome and pushy, and are causing a hell of a lot of trouble. Again, not ALL of them by any means, it\'s clearly a small minority, but that small minority is only denounced as lip-service by the majority of their fellow-minded immigrants. It has shit nothing to do with the foodstuffs, and they are actually stopping British citizens and demanding that they pour out their alcohol on the street, which is a far cry from consuming cheap beer in the street (something the Brits mostly approve of in fact...)... The Bulgarians? No idea about them, haven\'t heard a word of the controversy. As for the islanders like you, man, don\'t you know I live part-time in Miami, you Jamaicans are a hoot, haven\'t met one I didn\'t like yet.

Radical Islam is a global problem and, actually, in London it\'s a much much smaller problem than news reports would have people believe. I know many muslims but no jihadists (as far as I know!) I don\'t have the answers there but I would maintain that knowing somebody, knowing and respecting their culture is going to lessen the chances they will do you harm.


In the end Ray, if you\'re ever in the US drop me a line, it\'d be my honest pleasure to buy you a beer or three and have a chat. I think you\'d be surprised at how many stereotypes you\'ve got wrong about me. ;)


Cory, I would be happy to have a beer with you and would insist on buying you the first one! I hope I haven\'t stereotyped you, I\'m learning about you all the time. I much prefer a person to say the difficult thing honestly than pay lip service to the correct line. Look at that - we\'ve cured racism right there!
08/29/2014 05:53:02 AM · #59
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Cory:

Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?


And that is the argument that is most commonly made. I'm just fairly skeptical that we can get rid of racism when we live in a world where there are laws based on race. And interesting conundrum don't you think?


but what should happen? Let's say there is a law 300 years ago that says that Native Americans are subhuman and any white man can take their land. Is it enough to say 200 years later when the white people have all the land that the law was unjust and it will now be repealed and there will no longer be a law that allows people to take other people's land based on their skin colour. Of course it's not fair - the white people have all the land and the Native Americans are starving on dusty reservations. It's not racist to say that Native Americans should, say, be given an area of land for their own. They were robbed and now they are getting redress. It was a racist law and the new law is anti-racist or repair-racist.
08/29/2014 08:02:31 AM · #60
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Cory:

Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?


My feelings exactly my friend.

I have had the opportunity and priviledge of working on many a reservation and unlike most others welcomed the day that they initiated the Tribal Police.

Who best understands and can liaise with the people of an environment than their own kind.

Added to that was the fact that many individuals (whites) had a preconceived idea of what natives were liked and carried a boatload of prejudicial views about the very community they were sent to serve.

Sad that.

Ray
08/29/2014 08:06:11 AM · #61
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Cory:

Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?


And that is the argument that is most commonly made. I'm just fairly skeptical that we can get rid of racism when we live in a world where there are laws based on race. And interesting conundrum don't you think?


OK... how about if the job requirement specified that one had to have the ability to communicate in Navajo... would you still consider that a racist ploy or would that more accurately fall into the category of "Job requirement"?

Ray
09/02/2014 02:18:01 AM · #62
There are so many different conversations happening at once here it's hard to keep up. In any case my two cents:

Robbery, provocation, details aside, the benefit of the doubt, when in doubt, is swayed by race.

The bottom line is they were unarmed teenagers. If they were white, the conversation would be completely different. It wouldn't be "one less thug off the street" (yes, I've seen multiple people comment that way where anonymity lets the racism fly) and much more a story of a teenager that lost his way and died in a tragic way.

The point is... EVEN IF it was mostly the teens fault, if they had been white there would be a lot more empathy and a lot less "he deserved it" talk.

This article is the best one I've seen illustrating this idea, to the extreme:

When the media treats white killers better than black victims

From the article:
"This is by no means standard media protocol, but it happens frequently, deliberately or not. News reports often headline claims from police or other officials that appear unsympathetic or dismissive of black victims. Other times, the headlines seem to suggest that black victims are to blame for their own deaths, engaging in what critics sometimes allege is a form of character assassination. When contrasted with media portrayal of white suspects and accused murderers, the differences are more striking. News outlets often choose to run headlines that exhibit an air of disbelief at an alleged white killer's supposed actions. Sometimes, they appear to go out of their way to boost the suspect's character, carrying quotes from relatives or acquaintances that often paint even alleged murderers in a positive light."
09/02/2014 10:03:56 AM · #63
... and then during the Martin case, one must remember that for the longest time the image shown of him was of a young, frail looking young man, the bearer of candy and a poor defenceless person set upon by what some referred to as a crazed wanna be cop.

Perception in some instances is what one makes of it... nothing more.

Sadly, in both cases, the victim is dead and as such we have to rely on the version of the witnesses and there are different versions of what transpired.

I for one will wait until all the evidence is presented and will abide by the decision made by the jurors.
09/02/2014 07:41:20 PM · #64
Originally posted by escapetooz:



The point is... EVEN IF it was mostly the teens fault, if they had been white there would be a lot more empathy and a lot less "he deserved it" talk.



Actually, there would be (and is) a lot less talk in general. (See case I referred to above)
09/05/2014 10:38:36 AM · #65
Originally posted by karmat:

Originally posted by escapetooz:



The point is... EVEN IF it was mostly the teens fault, if they had been white there would be a lot more empathy and a lot less "he deserved it" talk.



Actually, there would be (and is) a lot less talk in general. (See case I referred to above)


I was going to address this but this article does it better.

In any case, this is typical grasping at straws I see all the time. If there is foul cried about a black victim, conservatives scramble to find a comparable white victim. It's like this guy that showed up in my feminist class to cry that men get raped too, and that men also have beauty standards. Yes. It's true. Bad things happen to white men. That's not the point.

The point is addressing the SYSTEMATIC disenfranchisement of minorities and women. Black communities, esp in places with a high rate of police violence, are already brimming with frustration over incidences that happen all of the time. Innocent people hauled off to jail that look nothing like the suspects, people beaten, false arrests, etc, etc. An incident like this is the last straw, and the community reacts. You cannot make a comparison and take out all other factors. That's not the way the world works.

Message edited by author 2014-09-05 10:39:22.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:36:46 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:36:46 AM EDT.