Taking the knee

[Badger 2,405]

6 hours ago, East Rider said:

I don't wish to sound picky however, you have quoted aspects from an incident 27/28 years ago and just highlighted one of my observations. I reiterate if you had been offered the opportunity to work with them as I was for many years, I feel your stance would be somewhat different.  

My experience is from the last two decades. I strongly suspect their were racist issues in the police many years ago as there were certainly in the military and elsewhere.

I mentioned the Steven Lawrence case as you raised it and of course, the Macpherson report was seminal. I have never worked in the police or the military so can't comment from personal experience the way that you do, but I have certainly known some good and dedicated people in both fields. 

I have worked in other fields which has involved interaction professional people that have made some racist remarks - but nothing as abhorrent as what we have seen in the past. The situation has improved in many fields but I do not feel that the problem is "solved" and I think there is still work to be done. 

e.g. "The findings showed that prosecutors regularly deployed racial stereotypes in relation to black defendants"

"According to government data, between April 2018 and March 2019, there were four stop and searches for every 1,000 white people, compared with 38 for every 1,000 black people."

Both https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/resources/institutional-racism-police-how-entrenched-has-it-become

(I know it has been suggested that the figures are higher for Black people because they are more likely to live in London but it would not explain a disparity this wide - the population of London has a white majority.)

The following is the experience of a Black Police Officer in London (although obviously anecdotal)

I have been likened to confectionery, heard racist language passed off as a joke and witnessed BAME officers in plain clothes accused of being intruders or told they look like they’ve just left the custody suite by other officers. That’s just in the last 12 months. The offenders continue to hold their jobs and one has even been promoted. So believe me, we understand the black community’s lack of trust in policing.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/15/black-police-officer-met-institutionally-racist-bame-officers

The Equality and Human Rights Commission report "Police and racism" concluded:

In some areas the police service is making clear progress in delivering race equality. We have also identified issues and concerns that appear to have been ignored, or where initiatives are having little impact. We have detected a lack of rigor or interest among the police service and other agencies when it comes to certain policing issues, such as the national DNA database and stop and search disproportionality. The significant degree of race disproportionality found in the maintenance of the national DNA database (a database supported by the police) and stop and search also stigmatises certain sections of the community, in particular black men. This can result in the dangerous assumption that they are seen by some members of the public as an ‘alien wedge’ of criminality. We need to continue to press the police service, the Home Office and other agencies to maintain their progress. However, the police should be applauded for the undoubted headway they have made towards greater race equality in the last decade.

A more recent report has also questioned the extent of progress. A Joint Committee of the Houses of Commons and Lords on "Black people, racism and human rights" was critical and says that some things have become worse in recent years:

“in the last decade, the extent to which black children and young people are disproportionately targeted by the youth justice system has increased”

https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/3376/documents/32359/default/

Baroness Lawrence asked the joint committee, “How many more lessons do we all need to learn? The lessons are there already for us to implement."

Add to these a litany of other inquiries in recent years, including the Windrush Lessons Learned review (2020), the race disparity audit (2017, spanning nearly all public sectors), the Lammy report (2017, looking specifically at criminal justice), the McGregor-Smith review (2017, focusing on labour markets) and the Angiolini review (2017, investigating deaths in police custody). What each of these reports makes plain is that in order to deny that racism is a key feature of disparities in these sectors, institutions and organisations must actively try to ignore it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/12/report-racism-human-rights-committee-findings

I thought your post was genuine and thoughtful but perhaps, over-optimistic. I don't speak from personal experience but the evidence seems quite clear to me: more needs to be done. 

Unfortunately, we have seem with some on this board (not yourself) to even suggest that there might be an issue is likely to attract personal abuse and lies, but it is too important an issue to be allow ourselves to be bullied on.

Thank you for your reasoned and polite argument which is conspicuous in its absence elsewhere. 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

"I know that you will feel this is unfair and please don't take it personally, but I fear that this is why some people may believe that you are racist. You might not like it, but if they believe that the system discriminates against them, those that are not prepared to reform the system to remove discrimination are complicit in supporting the racism that it sustains"

So there you have it, unless you fully agree with people who "believe that the system discriminates against them" that "the system is racist" in Badgers own words you will probably be considered a racist. The worst I've accused anybody of is being ideologically, rather than factually, driven and maybe unaware of the background of BLM and the Critical Race Theory. Your statement above is basically a Kafka Trap: " agree with me on this ideological position that I cannot prove, or you are part of a pernicious resistance to acceptance of my unproven ideological position". This is authoritarianism 101.

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

3 hours ago, Mr Angry said:

It wouldn’t really matter if they stopped using it-people who disagree with the concept that black lives matter would continue to use the “defund the police” slogan as an excuse for evermore.

I'm just curious, is it only black lives that matter? What about Chinese lives? Hispanic lives? Aboriginal lives? Are they less important? Or do we mean non-white live matter?

 

 

Edited December 15, 2020 by Iwans Big Toe

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

And if it is only black lives matter, surely that's racial profiling?

 

 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

15 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

I'm just curious, is it only black lives that matter? What about Chinese lives? Hispanic lives? Aboriginal lives? Are they less important? Or do we mean non-white live matter?

 

 

Aaaaaaand round we go again !!!!

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

38 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

Aaaaaaand round we go again !!!!

I'm still unclear, is it only black lives that matter? What about other ethic minority lives? If it is only BLM surely that's racist? I just need a clear answer, yes or no?

 

 

 

[Herman 9,710]

As was explained very early on, in numerous threads, it's Black Lives Matter TOO not Black Lives Matter MORE nor ONLY Black Lives Matter. Come on my friends, this isn't hard to get.

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

18 minutes ago, Herman said:

As was explained very early on, in numerous threads, it's Black Lives Matter TOO not Black Lives Matter MORE nor ONLY Black Lives Matter. Come on my friends, this isn't hard to get.

So ALL lives matter?

I thought that was a taboo phrase?

 

 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

46 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

So ALL lives matter?

I thought that was a taboo phrase?

 

 

Boring now. You've come a bit late to that particular  party. Argue among  yourself, no one else thinks its clever or funny anymore. 

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

8 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

Boring now. You've come a bit late to that particular  party. Argue among  yourself, no one else thinks its clever or funny anymore. 

Apparently it's never too late to avoid giving a straight yes or no answer. Unless you've lost the argument of course.

 

 

 

 

[Mr Angry 1,545]

[Naturalcynic 628]

6 hours ago, Mr Angry said:

After 19 pages of discussion, much of it well-argued and no-one posting anything remotely racist, this is what you come out with.  Pathetic.

 

Edited December 16, 2020 by Naturalcynic

[Badger 2,405]

13 hours ago, Mr.Carrow said:

"I know that you will feel this is unfair and please don't take it personally, but I fear that this is why some people may believe that you are racist. You might not like it, but if they believe that the system discriminates against them, those that are not prepared to reform the system to remove discrimination are complicit in supporting the racism that it sustains"

So there you have it, unless you fully agree with people who "believe that the system discriminates against them" that "the system is racist" in Badgers own words you will probably be considered a racist. The worst I've accused anybody of is being ideologically, rather than factually, driven and maybe unaware of the background of BLM and the Critical Race Theory. Your statement above is basically a Kafka Trap: " agree with me on this ideological position that I cannot prove, or you are part of a pernicious resistance to acceptance of my unproven ideological position". This is authoritarianism 101.

Once again you rely upon invention to make a point and doso to try to avoid the huge body of evidence that contradicts your point. There is a huge body of evidence that I have provided about the continuation of racism in our society, which you ignore (so much for the facts, heh?) Instead, you choose to highlight something which is self-evidently true as if it were proof of something. Most of the rest of what you have written in the second paragraph is totally illogical on top of being based upon a false premise:

1. It is not my ideological position - it is a position that you have invented. 

2. I can prove the existence of racism within our society and provided a huge body of evidence to this end: evidence that you, Iwan's Big Toe, RBT etc have refused to engage with, because the facts don't fit your narrative.

Do you actually think that that the quotation in the first paragraph is factually wrong?

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

10 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

Apparently it's never too late to avoid giving a straight yes or no answer. Unless you've lost the argument of course.

 

 

 

 

It's not an argument, we're  playing  handball with a haystack.....pointless exercise. 

[Herman 9,710]

29 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

It's not an argument, we're  playing  handball with a haystack.....pointless exercise. 

You can only explain the simplest things so many times,especially if it looks like someone is willfully trying not to understand. 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

Duplicate post removed, no point repeating myself .

Edited December 16, 2020 by wcorkcanary

[Mr Angry 1,545]

5 hours ago, Naturalcynic said:

After 19 pages of discussion, much of it well-argued and no-one posting anything remotely racist, this is what you come out with.  Pathetic.

 

Do you really believe that nobody who has commented on the thread is racist? Naive.

[Barbe bleu 812]

2 hours ago, Badger said:

Once again you rely upon invention to make a point and doso to try to avoid the huge body of evidence that contradicts your ...

I bet that if you and mr carrow were locked in a room and not let out until you produced a statement on what you can agree on neither of you would find this a difficult exercise.

On here though you are both focusing on the, actually probably quite narrow, bits where you don't 100% agree.

 

[Badger 2,405]

45 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

I bet that if you and mr carrow were locked in a room and not let out until you produced a statement on what you can agree on neither of you would find this a difficult exercise.

On here though you are both focusing on the, actually probably quite narrow, bits where you don't 100% agree.

 

I agree. Leaving aside the use of statistical evidence, the main difference, as I see it, is that Mr C doesn't like attention given to individual interest groups and thinks that we should address the issue of poverty/ inequality as a for the whole community. I am very happy with Mr C's approach to poverty but I would wish to add additional solutions.

I think that there are some issues that all groups of poorer people have in common and of course, would want all of these addressed. Where we differ is that I think that there are certain issues that are particularly a problem for some ethnic minorities e.g. some aspects of the criminal justice system, where the evidence is overwhelming that some groups suffer disproportionately. I feel that additional measures need to be taken for this group to correct specific discrimination that applies to some ethnic groups - e.g. better procedures for stop and search/ sentence guidelines/ review of practices in court. 

As I understand it, Mr C sees this as divisive and separates out "the proletariat." into different groups. In my defence, I am consistent with at all of the major reports on the issue over the last 20 years, right up to the joint committee in Parliament earlier this year. I have no reason for overruling their minute scrutiny of all the facts.

The obvious solution in my mind would be to do both what Mr C wants (which I support anyway) PLUS the additional measures suggested by the expert committees.

Edited December 16, 2020 by Badger
Added last sentence