Police lives matter

[ellal]

I think the Black Lives Matter campaign gives the wrong message, it allows misinterpretation.... although it was set up to mean 'Black lives matter too'

Maybe 'All Lives matter' would be appropriate?

However since Blacks are disproportionately targetted, you can understand the reasoning.

 

[ellal]

I’d say it was the other way round. Do yourself a favour and search 'mottie' posts by ellal and then do a search on 'ellal' by Mottie and tell me honestly who is the worse offender when it comes to name calling and goading.

I ain't the one with all the prejudical issues that you bandy around

 

[Mottie]

I ain't the one with all the prejudical issues that you bandy around

Sorry Ellal, missed that. Did you say you were male, female or PNTS?

 

[Deleted2797112]

Blacks

To quote sodthisforfun (which I don't do very often):

"The blacks?

You mean black people... *sigh*

You sound like Donald Trump."

https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/frankly-my-dear-i-dont-give-a-damn.546839/page-3#ixzz6PFDSWVJR

 

[ajohn]

I think the Black Lives Matter campaign gives the wrong message, it allows misinterpretation.... although it was set up to mean 'Black lives matter too'

It's spread way further than that now. One of the problems with that link I posted is that it didn't account for populations. Back 3.3%, Asian 7.5%, mixed 2.2%, Chinese lumped in a with Asian. White British is about 80.5% white other 4.4%. Gypsy and Irish combined 1%. I'm not suggesting anything by mentioning those together. A lot of my teenage friends had Irish parents.

Those numbers make the crime problem an expensive one yet nothing is ever really done about it. Crime isn't built into DNA and the most recent ideas about success aren't either. Years ago there was a thought that families remained rich through generations due to DNA. Some get it via inheritance and help but latest thoughts put it down to knowing it's possible and drive. As people in another area can be radicalised I have always thought education is the answer but it needs teachers that kids respect. Some small % lack that. It will also take a long time to have any permanent effect. All sorts of things need putting into perspective as well.

 

[ellal]

"The blacks?

You mean black people... *sigh*

So you have nothing to add to the discussion...

You'd have loved 'softus', an old contributor who had the same approach

 

[Deleted2797112]

So you have nothing to add to the discussion...

I've highlighted your lazy racism. That'll do for me.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

The first section at the top shows that black kids look like they get a worse start in life than others.

Crime isn't built into DNA and the most recent ideas about success aren't either.

Sometimes, ajohn, you make very valid points. It's a shame that your valid points are often lost in verbosity. (I know, I can talk!)
A young, black, American, female economics teacher (adjectives not in order of priority) explained structural inequality in a very simple to understand analogy.
Imagine you were playing monopoly. You didn't have a choice, you had to play.
For the first 400 rounds, (equivalent to the years of slavery and civil rights movement) you were playing for someone else (who was also playing). All your accumulated assets belong to this other player. No matter how successful you were, at the end of the 400 rounds, you were stripped of all your accumulated wealth (which was given to the other player, for whom you had been playing) and you were reduced to continuing to play with nothing. As the other (white) players became bored (i.e.passed on) their accumulated wealth was handed to the next white player.
When occasionally, you became successful, your accumulated wealth was taken and or destroyed (Tulsa and Rosewood). You were obliged to continue playing as before, but again, with a zero starting position. You had no choice about playing, you still had to play.
All the white accumulated wealth was passed on, from one white player to the next white player and so on.
It's a game that is fixed against you. You cannot win.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-u...ter-how-can-we-win-monopoly-analogy-explained

The inventor of this analogy likened it to the structural inequality in USA, but it applies equally to UK and other countries.
So, when ajohn says crime isn't built into our DNA, he's right, but wealth and inequality is built into our history. Our history, and our future is determined by that structural inequality.
We cannot change our history, but it is right that we try to change our future.

 

[ellal]

I've highlighted your lazy racism. That'll do for me.

Amazing how you are so wrong, but still insist on highlighting your ignorance at every opportunity...

Keep it up

 

[JohnD]

Sorry Ellal, missed that. Did you say you were male, female or PNTS?

School bully. Perhaps mottie was one of the "mean girls"

 

[ajohn]

The inventor of this analogy likened it to the structural inequality in USA, but it applies equally to UK and other countries.
So, when ajohn says crime isn't built into our DNA, he's right, but wealth and inequality is built into our history. Our history, and our future is determined by that structural inequality.
We cannot change our history, but it is right that we try to change our future.

The history aspect is one of the things that need putting into perspective via education. The USA in my view is entirely different to the UK.

Slavery is an unfortunate fact but here at least I don't think this has any bearing on inequality. Victorian ideas about races referred to as savages, the white man's burden etc probably do have something to do with racism but most of the people who might have been contaminated by that have now died out - more recently than you might think.

Into perspective. I'll just mention one I have before from working in Dublin. Talking to a well educated Irishman in a far better job than the majority get to do who explained all of the woes Britain had inflicted on Ireland over many years. I hadn't been taught any of them. However later I looked at what Britain did. Some good some bad depends on how it's looked at. Neither of us was taught about both aspects or had the good and bad aspects clarified.

 

[durhamplumber]

Sometimes, ajohn, you make very valid points. It's a shame that your valid points are often lost in verbosity. (I know, I can talk!)
A young, black, American, female economics teacher (adjectives not in order of priority) explained structural inequality in a very simple to understand analogy.
Imagine you were playing monopoly. You didn't have a choice, you had to play.
For the first 400 rounds, (equivalent to the years of slavery and civil rights movement) you were playing for someone else (who was also playing). All your accumulated assets belong to this other player. No matter how successful you were, at the end of the 400 rounds, you were stripped of all your accumulated wealth (which was given to the other player, for whom you had been playing) and you were reduced to continuing to play with nothing. As the other (white) players became bored (i.e.passed on) their accumulated wealth was handed to the next white player.
When occasionally, you became successful, your accumulated wealth was taken and or destroyed (Tulsa and Rosewood). You were obliged to continue playing as before, but again, with a zero starting position. You had no choice about playing, you still had to play.
All the white accumulated wealth was passed on, from one white player to the next white player and so on.
It's a game that is fixed against you. You cannot win.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-u...ter-how-can-we-win-monopoly-analogy-explained

The inventor of this analogy likened it to the structural inequality in USA, but it applies equally to UK and other countries.
So, when ajohn says crime isn't built into our DNA, he's right, but wealth and inequality is built into our history. Our history, and our future is determined by that structural inequality.
We cannot change our history, but it is right that we try to change our future.

My pet hate....cretionous analogies....Monopoly..Dice game based on chance...Fekall to do with racism.

 

[durhamplumber]

As the other (white) players became bored

Who can blame them,with you around.They will probably all lynch themselves to save them from your tedious monologs.

 

[Mottie]

Perhaps mottie was one of the "mean girls"

How very dare you assume my gender!

 

[Vinty]

Sometimes, ajohn, you make very valid points. It's a shame that your valid points are often lost in verbosity. (I know, I can talk!)
A young, black, American, female economics teacher (adjectives not in order of priority) explained structural inequality in a very simple to understand analogy.
Imagine you were playing monopoly. You didn't have a choice, you had to play.
For the first 400 rounds, (equivalent to the years of slavery and civil rights movement) you were playing for someone else (who was also playing). All your accumulated assets belong to this other player. No matter how successful you were, at the end of the 400 rounds, you were stripped of all your accumulated wealth (which was given to the other player, for whom you had been playing) and you were reduced to continuing to play with nothing. As the other (white) players became bored (i.e.passed on) their accumulated wealth was handed to the next white player.
When occasionally, you became successful, your accumulated wealth was taken and or destroyed (Tulsa and Rosewood). You were obliged to continue playing as before, but again, with a zero starting position. You had no choice about playing, you still had to play.
All the white accumulated wealth was passed on, from one white player to the next white player and so on.
It's a game that is fixed against you. You cannot win.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-u...ter-how-can-we-win-monopoly-analogy-explained

The inventor of this analogy likened it to the structural inequality in USA, but it applies equally to UK and other countries.
So, when ajohn says crime isn't built into our DNA, he's right, but wealth and inequality is built into our history. Our history, and our future is determined by that structural inequality.
We cannot change our history, but it is right that we try to change our future.

Doesnt that analogy only work if you assume that all white people were wealthy
and therefor had wealth to pass on.

Most white people in the past were ****
poor and had no wealth to pass on, this might go some way to explain the structural inequality among the working classes.

Statistically poor people stay poor down the generations, although it is probably the case that black communities experience structural inequalities to a greater extent than white communties.