White Lives Matter To Be Listed As Hate Group

[Czernobog]

How about you tell me what "Black Lives Matter" is dumbass. How about you actually read what they themselves say, fucknut, and you will see that it is about equality. The point is that "Black Lives Matter, TOO. They just expect people to be smart enough to understand the "too" is understood. I guess they never met a pinhead, like you.

No dumbfuck, they are pro-black. To not be pro-black is to be anti-black.

You're a ******* idiot. To be Pro-Equality is being pro-black. AND Pro-White. AND Pro-Gay. AND Pro-Latino. To be, specifically, Pro-White, is to say, "**** you" to everyone but whites. It. Is. Racist.

You are the one assigning this "pro-equality" trait to a group that says nothing about helping non-blacks.

That's a lie. In their own words:

We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working for vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people. As we forger our path, we intentionally build, and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.
​

The emphasis is mine to demonstrate your lie, which you would know is a lie, if you bothered to read what Black Lives Matter has to say about themselves, rather than relying on what the racist propaganda has to say about them.

You mean like pigs in a blanket, fryem like bacon??

That's racist? Funny, while not entirely appropriate, I thought it was anti-police. Are all police white, now? I must have missed that. When did that happen?

 

[eagle7_31]

No dumbfuck, they are pro-black. To not be pro-black is to be anti-black.

You're a ******* idiot. To be Pro-Equality is being pro-black. AND Pro-White. AND Pro-Gay. AND Pro-Latino. To be, specifically, Pro-White, is to say, "**** you" to everyone but whites. It. Is. Racist.

You are the one assigning this "pro-equality" trait to a group that says nothing about helping non-blacks.

That's a lie. In their own words:

We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working for vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people. As we forger our path, we intentionally build, and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.
​

The emphasis is mine to demonstrate your lie, which you would know is a lie, if you bothered to read what Black Lives Matter has to say about themselves, rather than relying on what the racist propaganda has to say about them.

You mean like pigs in a blanket, fryem like bacon??

That's racist? Funny, while not entirely appropriate, I thought it was anti-police. Are all police white, now? I must have missed that. When did that happen?

Just saying they are not exactly in the mainstream.

 

[ptbw forever]

What do you think BLACK Lives Matter is, dumbfuck?

Why do you guys always always turn retarded when confronted with the term "pro-white"?

How about you tell me what "Black Lives Matter" is dumbass. How about you actually read what they themselves say, fucknut, and you will see that it is about equality. The point is that "Black Lives Matter, TOO. They just expect people to be smart enough to understand the "too" is understood. I guess they never met a pinhead, like you.

No dumbfuck, they are pro-black. To not be pro-black is to be anti-black.

You're a ******* idiot. To be Pro-Equality is being pro-black. AND Pro-White. AND Pro-Gay. AND Pro-Latino. To be, specifically, Pro-White, is to say, "**** you" to everyone but whites. It. Is. Racist.

You are the one assigning this "pro-equality" trait to a group that says nothing about helping non-blacks.

That's a lie. In their own words:

We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working for vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people. As we forger our path, we intentionally build, and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.
​

The emphasis is mine to demonstrate your lie, which you would know is a lie, if you bothered to read what Black Lives Matter has to say about themselves, rather than relying on what the racist propaganda has to say about them.

Are you capable of reading at a 6th grade level?

They are saying that their problems are THE problem and by fixing them the world is better off. The "community" they are talking about is a black community, just like the "black villages"(the black equivalent of the PLEs white nationalists are setting up) they refer to later on.

The site says nothing about combatting anything but anti-black racism. Stop lying.

 

[Czernobog]

You're a ******* idiot. To be Pro-Equality is being pro-black. AND Pro-White. AND Pro-Gay. AND Pro-Latino. To be, specifically, Pro-White, is to say, "**** you" to everyone but whites. It. Is. Racist.

You are the one assigning this "pro-equality" trait to a group that says nothing about helping non-blacks.

That's a lie. In their own words:

We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working for vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people. As we forger our path, we intentionally build, and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.
​

The emphasis is mine to demonstrate your lie, which you would know is a lie, if you bothered to read what Black Lives Matter has to say about themselves, rather than relying on what the racist propaganda has to say about them.

You mean like pigs in a blanket, fryem like bacon??

That's racist? Funny, while not entirely appropriate, I thought it was anti-police. Are all police white, now? I must have missed that. When did that happen?

Just saying they are not exactly in the mainstream.

First, I never said they were "mainstream"; I said there is not evidence that they are racist. Second, BLM did not condone those early, inappropriate actions of individual protesters, and, in fact have, since, expressed regret over not being more careful with their own rhetoric that they feel might have encouraged that kind of behaviour.

 

[Czernobog]

How about you tell me what "Black Lives Matter" is dumbass. How about you actually read what they themselves say, fucknut, and you will see that it is about equality. The point is that "Black Lives Matter, TOO. They just expect people to be smart enough to understand the "too" is understood. I guess they never met a pinhead, like you.

No dumbfuck, they are pro-black. To not be pro-black is to be anti-black.

You're a ******* idiot. To be Pro-Equality is being pro-black. AND Pro-White. AND Pro-Gay. AND Pro-Latino. To be, specifically, Pro-White, is to say, "**** you" to everyone but whites. It. Is. Racist.

You are the one assigning this "pro-equality" trait to a group that says nothing about helping non-blacks.

That's a lie. In their own words:

We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working for vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people. As we forger our path, we intentionally build, and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.
​

The emphasis is mine to demonstrate your lie, which you would know is a lie, if you bothered to read what Black Lives Matter has to say about themselves, rather than relying on what the racist propaganda has to say about them.

i
Are you capable of reading at a 6th grade level?

They are saying that their problems are THE problem and by fixing them the world is better off. The "community" they are talking about is a black community, just like the "black villages"(the black equivalent of the PLEs white nationalists are setting up) they refer to later on.

The site says nothing about combatting anything but anti-black racism. Stop lying.

You're a moron. They are saying that inequality is the problem, and that by fighting inequality against blacks, helps to eliminate inequality against everyone..

Ya know what? You are a racist who thinks that Pro-Whiter is not racist, and thinks that equality means "Whites Lose". So, I do not feel the need to waste time trying to teach you the most simple concepts of civics.

Feel free to **** off. In case you're too stupid to even get that, that means I'm done with you.

 

[ptbw forever]

No dumbfuck, they are pro-black. To not be pro-black is to be anti-black.

You're a ******* idiot. To be Pro-Equality is being pro-black. AND Pro-White. AND Pro-Gay. AND Pro-Latino. To be, specifically, Pro-White, is to say, "**** you" to everyone but whites. It. Is. Racist.

You are the one assigning this "pro-equality" trait to a group that says nothing about helping non-blacks.

That's a lie. In their own words:

We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working for vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people. As we forger our path, we intentionally build, and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.
​

The emphasis is mine to demonstrate your lie, which you would know is a lie, if you bothered to read what Black Lives Matter has to say about themselves, rather than relying on what the racist propaganda has to say about them.

i
Are you capable of reading at a 6th grade level?

They are saying that their problems are THE problem and by fixing them the world is better off. The "community" they are talking about is a black community, just like the "black villages"(the black equivalent of the PLEs white nationalists are setting up) they refer to later on.

The site says nothing about combatting anything but anti-black racism. Stop lying.

You're a moron. They are saying that inequality is the problem, and that by fighting inequality against blacks, helps to eliminate inequality against everyone..

Ya know what? You are a racist who thinks that Pro-Whiter is not racist, and thinks that equality means "Whites Lose". So, I do not feel the need to waste time trying to teach you the most simple concepts of civics.

Feel free to **** off. In case you're too stupid to even get that, that means I'm done with you.

Funny how you moronically defend an organization that is black nationalist to the core and couldn't give less of a shit about you, but yet you think nothing of putting words in my mouth because I uttered the dreaded term, "pro-white".

Your IQ is 0 because you don't even possess the ability to think on your own.

 

[Czernobog]

 

[Correll]

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists.”

White Lives Matter will soon be listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

SPLC said the status will be reflected in the next update of its “Hate Map,” which tracks the activities of hate groups around the country.

“I can’t speak to how many chapters will be listed, but it’s clear that the leadership of the group, the ends of the group ― it’s just a flat-out white supremacist group,” Heidi Beirich, director of the center’s Intelligence Report, told the Houston Chronicle. “The ideology behind it, the racist leaders, everything about it is racist.”

White Lives Matter made headlines earlier this month when the group sent armed protesters to an NAACP office in Houston, where they waved Confederate flags.

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists,” Beirich told VICE News. “Their motto should be ‘only white lives matter.’”

Although some called for Black Lives Matter to be listed as a hate group after the shooting deaths of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, that organization doesn’t hold supremacist or separatist views and its leaders have condemned violence.

More: White Lives Matter To Be Listed As Hate Group

I agree with SPLC that White Lives Matter should be listed as a hate group based on their racist actions and rhetoric.

And yet, they provide no details about what is supposedly racist about their ideology nor their "ends".


Waving a Confederate flag is not a racist act.


The armed protesters seems extreme, but some open carry people just carry as a political statement.


The claim is unsupported.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

And yet it is the BLM group that calls for cops and whites to be murdered while cops have been murdered at their gatherings.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

I disagree with the notion these statistics exist because of the color of their skin. That is a cop out, no pun intended. I can tell you that here where I live, the police presence is targeted primarily at the black areas of town.... because that is where the predominance of the crime exists. Is that because of skin color? Nope. It is due to socio-economic factors for sure, and we can discuss that ad nausium. But, to simply dismiss it as racism is ridiculous.

Yeah, socioeconomic issues are actually a bigger deal than race for crime. A lot of the protests are actually being triggered by how those areas are policed. Ferguson exposed the fact that for many poor and high crime communities the police are originally from out of town, live out of town, and hence are seen as out of towners. That's a disaster for maintaining community dialogue and makes it hard for police to get to know the folks in town well enough to recognize when something is a problem and when it isn't.

I don't have a good solution for this. Would it help the problem for the police to recruit directly from the community? Sure. Would it help if you had to live in the community to be a police officer? That I'm not sure about. Tough issue.

 

[Czernobog]

And yet it is the BLM group that calls for cops and whites to be murdered while cops have been murdered at their gatherings.

Please offer evidence of that. Not cops, but whites, specifically.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists.”

White Lives Matter will soon be listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

SPLC said the status will be reflected in the next update of its “Hate Map,” which tracks the activities of hate groups around the country.

“I can’t speak to how many chapters will be listed, but it’s clear that the leadership of the group, the ends of the group ― it’s just a flat-out white supremacist group,” Heidi Beirich, director of the center’s Intelligence Report, told the Houston Chronicle. “The ideology behind it, the racist leaders, everything about it is racist.”

White Lives Matter made headlines earlier this month when the group sent armed protesters to an NAACP office in Houston, where they waved Confederate flags.

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists,” Beirich told VICE News. “Their motto should be ‘only white lives matter.’”

Although some called for Black Lives Matter to be listed as a hate group after the shooting deaths of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, that organization doesn’t hold supremacist or separatist views and its leaders have condemned violence.

More: White Lives Matter To Be Listed As Hate Group

I agree with SPLC that White Lives Matter should be listed as a hate group based on their racist actions and rhetoric.

They should be...just like Black Lives Matter.

 

[320 Years of History]

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists.”

White Lives Matter will soon be listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

SPLC said the status will be reflected in the next update of its “Hate Map,” which tracks the activities of hate groups around the country.

“I can’t speak to how many chapters will be listed, but it’s clear that the leadership of the group, the ends of the group ― it’s just a flat-out white supremacist group,” Heidi Beirich, director of the center’s Intelligence Report, told the Houston Chronicle. “The ideology behind it, the racist leaders, everything about it is racist.”

White Lives Matter made headlines earlier this month when the group sent armed protesters to an NAACP office in Houston, where they waved Confederate flags.

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists,” Beirich told VICE News. “Their motto should be ‘only white lives matter.’”

Although some called for Black Lives Matter to be listed as a hate group after the shooting deaths of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, that organization doesn’t hold supremacist or separatist views and its leaders have condemned violence.

More: White Lives Matter To Be Listed As Hate Group

I agree with SPLC that White Lives Matter should be listed as a hate group based on their racist actions and rhetoric.

The SPLC paints such a broad brush with their "hate group" screed that them calling out these actual racists will not have any real impact.

Of course, the next step for progressives is to link these white lives matters idiots with people who say "all lives matter", and thus continue the narrative that saying all lives matter is inherently racist.

Saying "All lives matter" isn't inherently racist. It is just pointless. Here's what I mean:

You, me, and...asy...30 other prople go to a restaurant for dinner. Everyone gets there food, except Mike.
So, Mike says, "Mike deserves food,"
You respond with ,"All 20 of us deserve food,"
While your statement is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that Mike still doesn't have his ******* food!!!

While saying "All live matter" is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that African Americans are being treated unfairly by our justice system. Black Lives Matter isn't about black people hate white people; it is about black people are pissed off at police, and the justice system.

BLM is predicated on a lie.

So, it is your contention that African Americans are not disproportionately incarcerated, or targeted by the police?

While people of color make up about 30 percent of the United States’ population, they account for 60 percent of those imprisoned. The prison population grew by 700 percent from 1970 to 2005, a rate that is outpacing crime and population rates. The incarceration rates disproportionately impact men of color: 1 in every 15 African American men and 1 in every 36 Hispanic men are incarcerated in comparison to 1 in every 106 white men.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, one in three black men can expect to go to prison in their lifetime. Individuals of color have a disproportionate number of encounters with law enforcement, indicating that racial profiling continues to be a problem. A report by the Department of Justice found that blacks and Hispanics were approximately three times more likely to be searched during a traffic stop than white motorists. African Americans were twice as likely to be arrested and almost four times as likely to experience the use of force during encounters with the police.

Students of color face harsher punishments in school than their white peers, leading to a higher number of youth of color incarcerated. Black and Hispanic students represent more than 70 percent of those involved in school-related arrests or referrals to law enforcement. Currently, African Americans make up two-fifths and Hispanics one-fifth of confined youth today.

And those are just a few indisputable facts, along with links to support the facts. But, BLM is predicated on a lie...

While I'm sympathetic to the circumstance of African-Americans, I'm also aware that the case, as you've presented it, is one where "correlation <> causality" is a valid response. It's safe to say I agree with your conclusions, but not because of the argument you've presented.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

And yet it is the BLM group that calls for cops and whites to be murdered while cops have been murdered at their gatherings.

Please offer evidence of that. Not cops, but whites, specifically.

There is no shortage from where this came from. BLM is a despicable racist organization.

Caught on Video=> Black Lives Matter Leader Calls for Running Over, Shooting Police

 

[Correll]

I disagree with the notion these statistics exist because of the color of their skin. That is a cop out, no pun intended. I can tell you that here where I live, the police presence is targeted primarily at the black areas of town.... because that is where the predominance of the crime exists. Is that because of skin color? Nope. It is due to socio-economic factors for sure, and we can discuss that ad nausium. But, to simply dismiss it as racism is ridiculous.

Yeah, socioeconomic issues are actually a bigger deal than race for crime. A lot of the protests are actually being triggered by how those areas are policed. Ferguson exposed the fact that for many poor and high crime communities the police are originally from out of town, live out of town, and hence are seen as out of towners. That's a disaster for maintaining community dialogue and makes it hard for police to get to know the folks in town well enough to recognize when something is a problem and when it isn't.

I don't have a good solution for this. Would it help the problem for the police to recruit directly from the community? Sure. Would it help if you had to live in the community to be a police officer? That I'm not sure about. Tough issue.

When I get pulled over by the cops, I don't know or care where they live.

 

[Czernobog]

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists.”

White Lives Matter will soon be listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

SPLC said the status will be reflected in the next update of its “Hate Map,” which tracks the activities of hate groups around the country.

“I can’t speak to how many chapters will be listed, but it’s clear that the leadership of the group, the ends of the group ― it’s just a flat-out white supremacist group,” Heidi Beirich, director of the center’s Intelligence Report, told the Houston Chronicle. “The ideology behind it, the racist leaders, everything about it is racist.”

White Lives Matter made headlines earlier this month when the group sent armed protesters to an NAACP office in Houston, where they waved Confederate flags.

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists,” Beirich told VICE News. “Their motto should be ‘only white lives matter.’”

Although some called for Black Lives Matter to be listed as a hate group after the shooting deaths of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, that organization doesn’t hold supremacist or separatist views and its leaders have condemned violence.

More: White Lives Matter To Be Listed As Hate Group

I agree with SPLC that White Lives Matter should be listed as a hate group based on their racist actions and rhetoric.

The SPLC paints such a broad brush with their "hate group" screed that them calling out these actual racists will not have any real impact.

Of course, the next step for progressives is to link these white lives matters idiots with people who say "all lives matter", and thus continue the narrative that saying all lives matter is inherently racist.

Saying "All lives matter" isn't inherently racist. It is just pointless. Here's what I mean:

You, me, and...asy...30 other prople go to a restaurant for dinner. Everyone gets there food, except Mike.
So, Mike says, "Mike deserves food,"
You respond with ,"All 20 of us deserve food,"
While your statement is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that Mike still doesn't have his ******* food!!!

While saying "All live matter" is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that African Americans are being treated unfairly by our justice system. Black Lives Matter isn't about black people hate white people; it is about black people are pissed off at police, and the justice system.

BLM is predicated on a lie.

So, it is your contention that African Americans are not disproportionately incarcerated, or targeted by the police?

While people of color make up about 30 percent of the United States’ population, they account for 60 percent of those imprisoned. The prison population grew by 700 percent from 1970 to 2005, a rate that is outpacing crime and population rates. The incarceration rates disproportionately impact men of color: 1 in every 15 African American men and 1 in every 36 Hispanic men are incarcerated in comparison to 1 in every 106 white men.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, one in three black men can expect to go to prison in their lifetime. Individuals of color have a disproportionate number of encounters with law enforcement, indicating that racial profiling continues to be a problem. A report by the Department of Justice found that blacks and Hispanics were approximately three times more likely to be searched during a traffic stop than white motorists. African Americans were twice as likely to be arrested and almost four times as likely to experience the use of force during encounters with the police.

Students of color face harsher punishments in school than their white peers, leading to a higher number of youth of color incarcerated. Black and Hispanic students represent more than 70 percent of those involved in school-related arrests or referrals to law enforcement. Currently, African Americans make up two-fifths and Hispanics one-fifth of confined youth today.

And those are just a few indisputable facts, along with links to support the facts. But, BLM is predicated on a lie...

While I'm sympathetic to the circumstance of African-Americans, I'm also aware that the case, as you've presented it, is one where "correlation <> causality" is a valid response. It's safe to say I agree with your conclusions, but not because of the argument you've presented.

Your response suggests that "other favors" can explain the statistics.

In the case of whites, and blacks being sentenced differently for the exact same crimes, by all mean, do feel free to present evidence of a factor other than race accounting for the difference.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Czernobog]

And yet it is the BLM group that calls for cops and whites to be murdered while cops have been murdered at their gatherings.

Please offer evidence of that. Not cops, but whites, specifically.

There is no shortage from where this came from. BLM is a despicable racist organization.

Caught on Video=> Black Lives Matter Leader Calls for Running Over, Shooting Police

Yeah. Police. Not whites. You specifically included whites in your accusation. I do not dispute that unkind things have been said about police. Guess what? Profession is not a Constitutionally protected "class"; race is.

I'm looking for evidence that BLM singled out whites in their rhetoric.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[320 Years of History]

The SPLC paints such a broad brush with their "hate group" screed that them calling out these actual racists will not have any real impact.

Of course, the next step for progressives is to link these white lives matters idiots with people who say "all lives matter", and thus continue the narrative that saying all lives matter is inherently racist.

Saying "All lives matter" isn't inherently racist. It is just pointless. Here's what I mean:

You, me, and...asy...30 other prople go to a restaurant for dinner. Everyone gets there food, except Mike.
So, Mike says, "Mike deserves food,"
You respond with ,"All 20 of us deserve food,"
While your statement is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that Mike still doesn't have his ******* food!!!

While saying "All live matter" is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that African Americans are being treated unfairly by our justice system. Black Lives Matter isn't about black people hate white people; it is about black people are pissed off at police, and the justice system.

BLM is predicated on a lie.

So, it is your contention that African Americans are not disproportionately incarcerated, or targeted by the police?

While people of color make up about 30 percent of the United States’ population, they account for 60 percent of those imprisoned. The prison population grew by 700 percent from 1970 to 2005, a rate that is outpacing crime and population rates. The incarceration rates disproportionately impact men of color: 1 in every 15 African American men and 1 in every 36 Hispanic men are incarcerated in comparison to 1 in every 106 white men.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, one in three black men can expect to go to prison in their lifetime. Individuals of color have a disproportionate number of encounters with law enforcement, indicating that racial profiling continues to be a problem. A report by the Department of Justice found that blacks and Hispanics were approximately three times more likely to be searched during a traffic stop than white motorists. African Americans were twice as likely to be arrested and almost four times as likely to experience the use of force during encounters with the police.

Students of color face harsher punishments in school than their white peers, leading to a higher number of youth of color incarcerated. Black and Hispanic students represent more than 70 percent of those involved in school-related arrests or referrals to law enforcement. Currently, African Americans make up two-fifths and Hispanics one-fifth of confined youth today.

And those are just a few indisputable facts, along with links to support the facts. But, BLM is predicated on a lie...

While I'm sympathetic to the circumstance of African-Americans, I'm also aware that the case, as you've presented it, is one where "correlation <> causality" is a valid response. It's safe to say I agree with your conclusions, but not because of the argument you've presented.

Your response suggests that "other favors" can explain the statistics.

In the case of whites, and blacks being sentenced differently for the exact same crimes, by all mean, do feel free to present evidence of a factor other than race accounting for the difference.

Red:
It does, although it's other behaviors not favors that I believe may be relevant to explaining the statistics. One example:

• "Individuals of color have a disproportionate number of encounters with law enforcement." -- No argument from me about about the accuracy of that metric. Might the greater quantity of encounters result from any of the following?
  • Black men get "tattled on" more than do other men? This could be by other blacks or by non-blacks. Finding out which is also part of answering the question.
  • People in the black community may be more likely to involve police when disputes happen? If black folks are materially more prone to call the cops than are other folks, cops are going to be present more often and thus more often able to "discover" chargeable infractions.

I'm not saying those things are or are not in play; I'm saying they are factors that if in play, could well lead to black men having disproportionately more encounters with cops. Do I know if those factors are in play and, if so, to what extent? No, I don't. I just know they need to be considered to determine whether or not they are material to the observed statistic you cited.

I have looked for answers to those questions, and I have not found any that are credible. If you or someone else can credibly address those unknowns and others like them, great, please do. I'm not terribly hard to convince either; merely show me a study that has a fully disclosed methodology and so long as I can tell the researchers' approach is largely reasonable, I'll accept the results. (I have the math/statistics skill to tell what is and is not a reasonable quantitative analysis approach in a given study. I'm not alone in that regard; almost everyone who's studied and used quantitative statistical measurement and analysis, who has a masters degree or who has BS in statistics does as well.)

Blue:
That particular observation is one that I agree militates for concurring with the conclusions you've presented.

As I said, I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion(s). I take exception with your having presented an incomplete argument for arriving at your conclusions. A meaningful part of maintaining intellectual integrity lies in fairly presenting the full picture, and to do that, one must at least give mention to what remains unclear given the existing body of available information.

Mind you, I'm not calling you out derisively. You're hardly the only person to present a social position without dialectical integrity. The gun lobby, for example, managed to get passed legislation that all but ensures that obtaining complete information about the nature of gun abuse just doesn't happen, or certainly doesn't happen anytime soon. Accordingly, the country is forced to make gun-related decisions on information that, while seemingly is "solid," is in fact inconclusive and/or incomplete, incomplete enough that there is always room to wrangle about what be the valid conclusions drawn from that information.

Lastly, are the folks with whom you've been trading posts in this thread presenting better quality arguments? No, not even close, at least not any that I've read. So, while you may not think so, my remarks are positive in spirit. Construe them not as my saying your argument is weak, but rather as my saying it could be stronger, more rigorous, and thus harder to refute, indeed hard enough that only an independent and focused study can effectively refute it. You clearly have the skill/ability to do that. You should, particularly for the thread topic (and related one) as you also are quite passionate about it.

It's just my opinion, but I think few posts most of which are of very high quality is worth more than lots insipid and puerile remarks, which is the substance of most of what I come across on USMB. Your post to which I responded isn't like that.

There's merit in Voltaire's 17th century variant of the Pareto Principle:

Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.
-- Voltaire, Philosophical Dictionary
​

...but as in all things context is critical The phrase is meant to apply to tangible actions and observations, not to individuals conjuring and expressing ideas. One doesn't need to build a perfect mousetrap; one need only build one that will catch and hold a mouse. Applying the same concept to critical examinations of the world around us, to our society, results in our "racing to the bottom" as less and less is becomes "good enough."

 

[Conservative65]

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists.”

White Lives Matter will soon be listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

SPLC said the status will be reflected in the next update of its “Hate Map,” which tracks the activities of hate groups around the country.

“I can’t speak to how many chapters will be listed, but it’s clear that the leadership of the group, the ends of the group ― it’s just a flat-out white supremacist group,” Heidi Beirich, director of the center’s Intelligence Report, told the Houston Chronicle. “The ideology behind it, the racist leaders, everything about it is racist.”

White Lives Matter made headlines earlier this month when the group sent armed protesters to an NAACP office in Houston, where they waved Confederate flags.

“We are listing them because they are clearly white supremacists,” Beirich told VICE News. “Their motto should be ‘only white lives matter.’”

Although some called for Black Lives Matter to be listed as a hate group after the shooting deaths of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, that organization doesn’t hold supremacist or separatist views and its leaders have condemned violence.

More: White Lives Matter To Be Listed As Hate Group

I agree with SPLC that White Lives Matter should be listed as a hate group based on their racist actions and rhetoric.

The SPLC paints such a broad brush with their "hate group" screed that them calling out these actual racists will not have any real impact.

Of course, the next step for progressives is to link these white lives matters idiots with people who say "all lives matter", and thus continue the narrative that saying all lives matter is inherently racist.

Saying "All lives matter" isn't inherently racist. It is just pointless. Here's what I mean:

You, me, and...asy...30 other prople go to a restaurant for dinner. Everyone gets there food, except Mike.
So, Mike says, "Mike deserves food,"
You respond with ,"All 20 of us deserve food,"
While your statement is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that Mike still doesn't have his ******* food!!!

While saying "All live matter" is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that African Americans are being treated unfairly by our justice system. Black Lives Matter isn't about black people hate white people; it is about black people are pissed off at police, and the justice system.

BLM is predicated on a lie.

So, it is your contention that African Americans are not disproportionately incarcerated, or targeted by the police?

While people of color make up about 30 percent of the United States’ population, they account for 60 percent of those imprisoned. The prison population grew by 700 percent from 1970 to 2005, a rate that is outpacing crime and population rates. The incarceration rates disproportionately impact men of color: 1 in every 15 African American men and 1 in every 36 Hispanic men are incarcerated in comparison to 1 in every 106 white men.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, one in three black men can expect to go to prison in their lifetime. Individuals of color have a disproportionate number of encounters with law enforcement, indicating that racial profiling continues to be a problem. A report by the Department of Justice found that blacks and Hispanics were approximately three times more likely to be searched during a traffic stop than white motorists. African Americans were twice as likely to be arrested and almost four times as likely to experience the use of force during encounters with the police.

Students of color face harsher punishments in school than their white peers, leading to a higher number of youth of color incarcerated. Black and Hispanic students represent more than 70 percent of those involved in school-related arrests or referrals to law enforcement. Currently, African Americans make up two-fifths and Hispanics one-fifth of confined youth today.

And those are just a few indisputable facts, along with links to support the facts. But, BLM is predicated on a lie...

While I'm sympathetic to the circumstance of African-Americans, I'm also aware that the case, as you've presented it, is one where "correlation <> causality" is a valid response. It's safe to say I agree with your conclusions, but not because of the argument you've presented.

What circumstances?

 

[Conservative65]

Saying "All lives matter" isn't inherently racist. It is just pointless. Here's what I mean:

You, me, and...asy...30 other prople go to a restaurant for dinner. Everyone gets there food, except Mike.
So, Mike says, "Mike deserves food,"
You respond with ,"All 20 of us deserve food,"
While your statement is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that Mike still doesn't have his ******* food!!!

While saying "All live matter" is factually accurate, it does nothing to alter the fact that African Americans are being treated unfairly by our justice system. Black Lives Matter isn't about black people hate white people; it is about black people are pissed off at police, and the justice system.

BLM is predicated on a lie.

So, it is your contention that African Americans are not disproportionately incarcerated, or targeted by the police?

While people of color make up about 30 percent of the United States’ population, they account for 60 percent of those imprisoned. The prison population grew by 700 percent from 1970 to 2005, a rate that is outpacing crime and population rates. The incarceration rates disproportionately impact men of color: 1 in every 15 African American men and 1 in every 36 Hispanic men are incarcerated in comparison to 1 in every 106 white men.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, one in three black men can expect to go to prison in their lifetime. Individuals of color have a disproportionate number of encounters with law enforcement, indicating that racial profiling continues to be a problem. A report by the Department of Justice found that blacks and Hispanics were approximately three times more likely to be searched during a traffic stop than white motorists. African Americans were twice as likely to be arrested and almost four times as likely to experience the use of force during encounters with the police.

Students of color face harsher punishments in school than their white peers, leading to a higher number of youth of color incarcerated. Black and Hispanic students represent more than 70 percent of those involved in school-related arrests or referrals to law enforcement. Currently, African Americans make up two-fifths and Hispanics one-fifth of confined youth today.

And those are just a few indisputable facts, along with links to support the facts. But, BLM is predicated on a lie...

While I'm sympathetic to the circumstance of African-Americans, I'm also aware that the case, as you've presented it, is one where "correlation <> causality" is a valid response. It's safe to say I agree with your conclusions, but not because of the argument you've presented.

Your response suggests that "other favors" can explain the statistics.

In the case of whites, and blacks being sentenced differently for the exact same crimes, by all mean, do feel free to present evidence of a factor other than race accounting for the difference.

Red:
It does, although it's other behaviors not favors that I believe may be relevant to explaining the statistics. One example:

• "Individuals of color have a disproportionate number of encounters with law enforcement." -- No argument from me about about the accuracy of that metric. Might the greater quantity of encounters result from any of the following?
  • Black men get "tattled on" more than do other men? This could be by other blacks or by non-blacks. Finding out which is also part of answering the question.
  • People in the black community may be more likely to involve police when disputes happen? If black folks are materially more prone to call the cops than are other folks, cops are going to be present more often and thus more often able to "discover" chargeable infractions.

I'm not saying those things are or are not in play; I'm saying they are factors that if in play, could well lead to black men having disproportionately more encounters with cops. Do I know if those factors are in play and, if so, to what extent? No, I don't. I just know they need to be considered to determine whether or not they are material to the observed statistic you cited.

I have looked for answers to those questions, and I have not found any that are credible. If you or someone else can credibly address those unknowns and others like them, great, please do. I'm not terribly hard to convince either; merely show me a study that has a fully disclosed methodology and so long as I can tell the researchers' approach is largely reasonable, I'll accept the results. (I have the math/statistics skill to tell what is and is not a reasonable quantitative analysis approach in a given study. I'm not alone in that regard; almost everyone who's studied and used quantitative statistical measurement and analysis, who has a masters degree or who has BS in statistics does as well.)

Blue:
That particular observation is one that I agree militates for concurring with the conclusions you've presented.

As I said, I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion(s). I take exception with your having presented an incomplete argument for arriving at your conclusions. A meaningful part of maintaining intellectual integrity lies in fairly presenting the full picture, and to do that, one must at least give mention to what remains unclear given the existing body of available information.

Mind you, I'm not calling you out derisively. You're hardly the only person to present a social position without dialectical integrity. The gun lobby, for example, managed to get passed legislation that all but ensures that obtaining complete information about the nature of gun abuse just doesn't happen, or certainly doesn't happen anytime soon. Accordingly, the country is forced to make gun-related decisions on information that, while seemingly is "solid," is in fact inconclusive and/or incomplete, incomplete enough that there is always room to wrangle about what be the valid conclusions drawn from that information.

Lastly, are the folks with whom you've been trading posts in this thread presenting better quality arguments? No, not even close, at least not any that I've read. So, while you may not think so, my remarks are positive in spirit. Construe them not as my saying your argument is weak, but rather as my saying it could be stronger, more rigorous, and thus harder to refute, indeed hard enough that only an independent and focused study can effectively refute it. You clearly have the skill/ability to do that. You should, particularly for the thread topic (and related one) as you also are quite passionate about it.

It's just my opinion, but I think few posts most of which are of very high quality is worth more than lots insipid and puerile remarks, which is the substance of most of what I come across on USMB. Your post to which I responded isn't like that.

There's merit in Voltaire's 17th century variant of the Pareto Principle:

Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.
-- Voltaire, Philosophical Dictionary
​

...but as in all things context is critical The phrase is meant to apply to tangible actions and observations, not to individuals conjuring and expressing ideas. One doesn't need to build a perfect mousetrap; one need only build one that will catch and hold a mouse. Applying the same concept to critical examinations of the world around us, to our society, results in our "racing to the bottom" as less and less is becomes "good enough."

The issue I have with the numbers related to the disproportionate encounters with police by blacks is that the automatic assumption by those using them is that it's due to racism and racism only. Those doing that fail to take into account that it could be that blacks commit more crimes.