Critical Race Theory policy in hiring at UT

[synoptic 138]

22 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

What classes and concepts should be removed from schooling in your view? Be specific, because it is very difficult to tell what you are suggesting. Are classes on philosophy and ethics inappropriate? Cultural studies? What about critical thinking? Does a lesson plan on empathy get cut as well? In terms of morality, can schools still reprimand a student for bullying? For cheating? These concepts have been taught for literally thousands of years in schools throughout the world.  I don't see how you divorce these concepts from education and still have anything resembling school. 

The goal of primary education is to learn the basics, which for many centuries was the trivium (logic, grammar, rhetoric) and then the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy).  We have less emphasis on some of those subjects now and have put more emphasis on science, other branches of math, and history.  But ultimately, early level instruction should cover the primary subjects for the purpose of getting kids to a base level of proficiency.  Teach those and, as I stated earlier, enforce the rules (e.g. no cheating, plagiarism, fighting, etc) and kids will learn academics and begin to learn how to cooperate in society.  To answer your question, no, I don’t think classes such as ethics should be taught in primary education. 

[synoptic 138]

4 minutes ago, Mole said:

English class is now just reading television instruction manuals.  No literature allowed. No writing allowed either, except for maybe instruction manuals.

Art class is mixing colors and nothing else. Certainly no looking at or making art.

Music? I guess you could study the harmonic series, otherwise you’re out of luck. Certainly no music making or listening allowed.

History? Nope. Not even memorizing a list of dates.

The idea of not exposing students to a worldview or moral instruction isn’t possible. Seeking to return to an older, “3 Rs” approach is more just stating a preference for teaching a preapproved worldview/morality.

None of this was stated nor implied by me.

[Dahobbs 17420]

1 minute ago, synoptic said:

The goal of primary education is to learn the basics, which for many centuries was the trivium (logic, grammar, rhetoric) and then the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy).  We have less emphasis on some of those subjects now and have put more emphasis on science, other branches of math, and history.  But ultimately, early level instruction should cover the primary subjects for the purpose of getting kids to a base level of proficiency.  Teach those and, as I stated earlier, enforce the rules (e.g. no cheating, plagiarism, fighting, etc) and kids will learn academics and begin to learn how to cooperate in society.  To answer your question, no, I don’t think classes such as ethics should be taught in primary education. 

That's insane to me. I think our primary problem as a country is having a bunch of people who were never taught critical thinking skills. Philosophy and ethics should be promoted to the very top of the educational pillars. That doesn't mean teaching anything as the "right answer." Let's teach our children how to think, not necessarily what to think. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

11 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Johnny Sack arguing against CRT

Johnny Sack in other thread 

Same as it ever was 

Yeah dickhead, now post my entire post. Which was:

Think it’s time the generalizations about race either stop or be applied to everyone. The black community needs to start facing serious scrutiny from the media for the violence it disproportionately inflicts on society. This little boy’s death is no less significant than any of the violent felons the black community has martyred over the last few years and he deserves at least the same recognition.

Edited May 21, 2021 by Johnny Sack

[jimmyjazz 45512]

46 minutes ago, synoptic said:

If we want to start preaching moral values in schools and turn them into chapel minus the metaphysics, then we have the problem of who gets to decide what morals to teach and how.  Maybe instead just teach them the basic academics taught in primary education for centuries.  People don't need the state to install moral values.  

Maybe we should start with the fucking Declaration of Independence:  "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . ."

[Mole 4318]

2 minutes ago, synoptic said:

None of this was stated nor implied by me.

Quote

There is no need to have any worldview challenging to learn the basic subjects taught in k-12. 

There is no way to avoid challenging the worldview of students and teach those subjects in any meaningful way. Maybe most of it wouldn’t raise the ire of the culture warriors, but it’s impossible to study these subjects without challenging worldviews or dealing with a morality beyond “don’t cheat.” Messy is ok.

[Dahobbs 17420]

4 minutes ago, synoptic said:

None of this was stated nor implied by me.

I disagree. 

"I prefer no moral values preaching nor worldview installement in public schools."

This is a very broad and vague statement.  For instance, if no "worldview installement" or "moral values" can be taught in public schools, a logical implication of that is no literature that deals with a worldview or moral values can be taught either. Now, you may not have meant that, but that is why I asked for clarification. 

[Dahobbs 17420]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Maybe we should start with the fucking Declaration of Independence:  "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . ."

Can't teach that my friend. That's a worldview right there. 

[Dahobbs 17420]

6 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Yeah dickhead, now post my entire post. Which was:

Think it’s time the generalizations about race either stop or be applied to everyone. The black community needs to start facing serious scrutiny from the media for the violence it disproportionately inflicts on society. This little boy’s death is no less significant than any of the violent felons the black community has martyred over the last few years and he deserves at least the same recognition.

Do you really think the expanded quotation helps your cause here? 

[synoptic 138]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

That's insane to me. I think our primary problem as a country is having a bunch of people who were never taught critical thinking skills. Philosophy and ethics should be promoted to the very top of the educational pillars. That doesn't mean teaching anything as the "right answer." Let's teach our children how to think, not necessarily what to think. 

You teach them how to think by mastery of the primary subjects.  There is no such thing as critical thinking unless one is proficient in basic thinking.  One can’t do any useful philosophy without proficiency in logic.

 

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Maybe we should start with the fucking Declaration of Independence:  "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . ."

That was written by a slave owner.  

[TwiceHorn 31184]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

That's insane to me. I think our primary problem as a country is having a bunch of people who were never taught critical thinking skills. Philosophy and ethics should be promoted to the very top of the educational pillars. That doesn't mean teaching anything as the "right answer." Let's teach our children how to think, not necessarily what to think. 

I used the term primary schools or education earlier and I meant basically elementary, middle, and high school.  I think though that he meant elementary school.

I'm fine with giving kids a very basic, fundamental education at least until high school.  I think their need to be some basic skills "installed" before trying to get them applied in critical thinking.

Using an example, most literary study doesn't really begin until high school.

[jimmyjazz 45512]

1 minute ago, synoptic said:

You teach them how to think by mastery of the primary subjects.  There is no such thing as critical thinking unless one is proficient in basic thinking.  One can’t do any useful philosophy without proficiency in logic.

 

That was written by a slave owner.  

Which makes it even more remarkable.  Do you think it diminishes the concept?

Either you think my interpretation of the statement is flawed, or you think the author was flawed.  Which explanation is more consistent with the history of our increasingly complicated experiment of a country?

[Johnny Sack 8397]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Do you really think the expanded quotation helps your cause here? 

Yes I do.  If we want to have a legitimate conversation about race on a collective basis where we generalize people on race, then let's discuss violence.  Particularly interracial violence, where 90% of the time in a violent interaction between a white person and a black person the white person is the victim.  Maybe we should have our own version of "the talk".

[Dahobbs 17420]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I used the term primary schools or education earlier and I meant basically elementary, middle, and high school.  I think though that he meant elementary school.

I'm fine with giving kids a very basic, fundamental education at least until high school.  I think their need to be some basic skills "installed" before trying to get them applied in critical thinking.

Using an example, most literary study doesn't really begin until high school.

I think we do our children a disservice by treating them as less capable than they actually are. 

[Captainant 27309]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

Yes I do.  If we want to have a legitimate conversation about race on a collective basis where we generalize people on race, then let's discuss violence.  Particularly interracial violence, where 90% of the time in a violent interaction between a white person and a black person the white person is the victim.  Maybe we should have our own version of "the talk".

 

23 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Has anyone pointed out yet that the minorities are the real racists? 

Oooh weee were getting there

[Dahobbs 17420]

NM

Edited May 21, 2021 by Dahobbs

[jimmyjazz 45512]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Particularly interracial violence, where 90% of the time in a violent interaction between a white person and a black person the white person is the victim. 

Interesting statistic.  I've never heard that.  Got a source?

[synoptic 138]

3 minutes ago, Mole said:

There is no way to avoid challenging the worldview of students and teach those subjects in any meaningful way. Maybe most of it wouldn’t raise the ire of the culture warriors, but it’s impossible to study these subjects without challenging worldviews or dealing with a morality beyond “don’t cheat.” Messy is ok.

 

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I disagree. 

"I prefer no moral values preaching nor worldview installement in public schools."

This is a very broad and vague statement.  For instance, if no "worldview installement" or "moral values" can be taught in public schools, a logical implication of that is no literature that deals with a worldview or moral values can be taught either. Now, you may not have meant that, but that is why I asked for clarification. 

To clarify what I meant:

All sorts of events and lessons will challenge and shape one's worldview.  A kid can solve some geometry puzzles and have their worldview shaped.  I'm not suggesting we somehow shield kids from this.  I'm talking about direct, explicit instruction on complex ethical topics.   

 

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Which makes it even more remarkable.  Do you think it diminishes the concept?

Either you think my interpretation of the statement is flawed, or you think the author was flawed.  Which explanation is more consistent with the history of our increasingly complicated experiment of a country?

I have no idea about your interpretaion of the statement nor why it should be compared to the author, but we are all flawed.  I don't think the flaws of the author diminishes its statement.  Makes one wonder how he held all these ideas together with is actions, but that is people for you. 
 

[jimmyjazz 45512]

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Interesting statistic.  I've never heard that.  Got a source?

I had to look it up.  I'm not done digging, but if this article is correct, then this is typical Sack stat-mining, and in no way relevant, other than to support his inherent racism.

The key point is that 16% of white murder victims were killed by black offenders, whereas 8%-9% of black murder victims were killed by white offenders.  Hardly a 90% differential, which implies a 9:1 ratio.  In point of fact, it's 1.8X.

Data

 

 

Edited May 21, 2021 by jimmyjazz

[Dahobbs 17420]

3 minutes ago, synoptic said:

 

To clarify what I meant:

All sorts of events and lessons will challenge and shape one's worldview.  A kid can solve some geometry puzzles and have their worldview shaped.  I'm not suggesting we somehow shield kids from this.  I'm talking about direct, explicit instruction on complex ethical topics.   

 

Would teaching about the declaration of independence and all men being created equal count? It seems pretty explicit, complex, and ethical to me. This is a serious question, I want to understand the boundaries you'd impose. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

15 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I had to look it up.  I'm not done digging, but if this article is correct, then this is typical Sack stat-mining, and in no way relevant, other than to support his inherent racism.

The key point is that 16% of white murder victims were killed by black offenders, whereas 8%-9% of black murder victims were killed by white offenders.  Hardly a 90% differential, which implies a 9:1 ratio.  In point of fact, it's 1.8X.

Data

 

 

It is table 14 in this publication

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf

Here is a chart that is derived from table 14

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

17 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I had to look it up.  I'm not done digging, but if this article is correct, then this is typical Sack stat-mining, and in no way relevant, other than to support his inherent racism.

The key point is that 16% of white murder victims were killed by black offenders, whereas 8%-9% of black murder victims were killed by white offenders.  Hardly a 90% differential, which implies a 9:1 ratio.  In point of fact, it's 1.8X.

Data

 

 

I did not say murder.  I said violence.

[Macklemore 2899]

2 hours ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Because we still have systems (especially in justice) that knowingly or unknowingly tilt towards impacting certain races and incomes vastly different than rich white folks.

The drug war was an example I brought up earlier. Fair intent to get drugs off the streets but what happened was a whole generation of black males got incarcerated for minor crimes leading to a generation of black kids without fathers. You had different penalties for those who had cocaine rather than crack. White guys getting busted with pot had their hands slapped while black people with pot got max penalties (this is from personal experience). 

This doesnt necessarily stem from some nefarious body making racist laws (it might), but it is something we need to accept and address and look to see if other parts of our lives have these imbalances. 

I agree with you. What you are saying is reasonable and constructive. Systems and laws that are race neutral on their face, yet have a disparate impact on blacks need to be addressed like the example you brought up of different penalties for crack and powder cocaine. Same thing for the huge disparity in generational wealth, which is why I support reparations in the form of downpayment assistance so that the American dream of owning your own can be reality for those that suffered directly or from the aftereffects of redlining. What I find objectionable is that CRT, as weaponized, is designed to put Americans into 2 warring camps of oppressor/oppressed. If you are white, to be a true anti-racist "ally" it seems that you have to atone for your heritage and through a performative self-flagellation, where you are expected to say nothing good about our country, its founding or its heritage. CRT is infused with Marxism - an ideology responsible for the deaths of millions. Having your kids at a Christian school being indoctrinated by Marxist claptrap is intolerable considering the contempt Marxists have for Christianity. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa did it right. Statements and discussion of the horrors of apartheid and bringing those to justice. But the aim was reconciliation through restorative justice. That is what anti-racists should be pursuing instead, especially at a Christian school.

Edited May 21, 2021 by Macklemore

[Macklemore 2899]

2 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

who did you vote for in '16 and '20?

Gary Johnson and Joe Biden

[jimmyjazz 45512]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

It is table 14 in this publication

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf

Here is a chart that is derived from table 14

 

Now show us a plot including white-on-white and black-on-black.  You are being duped and you are too stupid to even figure out how.

[jimmyjazz 45512]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I did not say murder.  I said violence.

LMAO.  OK, I'm sure that changes the numbers.  Jesus, you are a fool.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Now show us a plot including white-on-white and black-on-black.  You are being duped and you are too stupid to even figure out how.

Why does that matter in a discussion of interracial violence?

Everyone knows most violence is not interracial. You keep moving the goal posts.  What I said, that in a violent interaction between a white and a black, is that 90 percent of the time the victim is the white, is true.  You disagreed and were owned like the dumbass you are.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Now show us a plot including white-on-white and black-on-black.  You are being duped and you are too stupid to even figure out how.

Same logic people say when minimizing the 20-30 or so unarmed blacks killed a year by cops -- nOw dO bLaCk oN bLaCk mUrDeRs oN a tYpIcAl cHiCaGo wEeKeNd!  

Edited May 21, 2021 by Johnny Sack

[Captainant 27309]

10 minutes ago, Macklemore said:

If you are white, to be a true anti-racist "ally" it seems that you have to atone for your heritage and through a performative self-flagellation, where you are expected to say nothing good about our country, its founding or its heritage. CRT is infused with Marxism - an ideology responsible for the deaths of millions. Having your kids at a Christian school being indoctrinated by Marxist claptrap is intolerable considering the contempt Marxists have for Christianity. 

[jimmyjazz 45512]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Why does that matter in a discussion of interracial violence?

Everyone knows most violence is not interracial. You keep moving the goal posts.  What I said, that in a violent interaction between a white and a black, is that 90 percent of the time the victim is the white, is true.  You disagreed and were owned like the dumbass you are.

You are one stupid motherfucker.  Who would you expect to be the victim of a crime, someone with relative wealth or relative poverty?

News flash:  97% of white offenders commit violent crime against . . . wait for it . . . white victims.

[mchookem 16094]

been thinking about this topic...and giving the benefit of the doubt...

i do not necessarily begrudge a parent doing everything in their power to further their child's privileges, provided that they do, indeed, also make learning about others, being kind, understanding racism (and women's issues, LGBTQ, etc.) and how it affects others, systemic impacts in history, having empathy, compassion and generosity for the less fortunate, understanding the challenges they have faced in the context of their lives to better relate to their fellow man a priority as well and so on... 

if a parent sincerely tries to impart positive values beyond 'i got mine, you get yours' and 'you are better than _____' on their children, while also being blessed enough to provide their child with a leg up...i don't begrudge that and i can understand the desire as a parent to take responsibility for that rather than having it done in a classroom.

however...

as we've seen and learned over the past several years, the number of parents who will NOT do that is far larger than i think most of us imagined. people who will in fact do the opposite and instill in their children all manner of odious and ignorant beliefs, is far more prominent than i ever imagined 5 years ago.

i have confessed elsewhere...after electing a black man president twice, i sincerely thought by and large those beliefs and the people that held them were indeed relegated to the dustbin of history (with the exception of far backwoods reaches and the like...Vidor, etc).

but to my great suprise and horror...they were instead apparently bubbling just below the surface, and it boiled over and into mainstream society so fast i probably spent at least a year in denial of what was actually transpiring. it has been heart-breaking. a repugnant renaissance if you will.  

so i wonder...for those children, who never see or discuss anything other than that mindset...schools may be the only place they are ever even exposed to an alternative image and perspective on the world. 

i do think there is inherent societal value in providing a more objective source on some of these difficult lessons in life.

i mean...public school is by definition intended to benefit society, no? i don't have children, but my tax dollars pay for it every bit as much as any parents. children's education is for my benefit as well. 

 

TL/DR: there are still way too many shitty people raising shitty kids out there and i wouldn't mind my tax dollars doing what they could to help counter that. 

Edited May 21, 2021 by mchookem

[52-80 19066]

46 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Yes I do.  If we want to have a legitimate conversation about race on a collective basis where we generalize people on race, then let's discuss violence.  Particularly interracial violence, where 90% of the time in a violent interaction between a white person and a black person the white person is the victim.  Maybe we should have our own version of "the talk".

 

32 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I had to look it up.  I'm not done digging, but if this article is correct, then this is typical Sack stat-mining, and in no way relevant, other than to support his inherent racism.

The key point is that 16% of white murder victims were killed by black offenders, whereas 8%-9% of black murder victims were killed by white offenders.  Hardly a 90% differential, which implies a 9:1 ratio.  In point of fact, it's 1.8X.

Data

even assuming homicide as proxy for all "violent interactions", your numbers arent comparing the same basis.

 

hes claiming of all incidents involving 2 races, 90% of those are B.o.W.

 

if of 100 white murder victims, 16 (16%)of them were killed by blacks

if of 100 black murder victims, 9 (9%) of them were killed by whites.

but if there were theoretically 500 total white murders, and 100 total black murders, the sum of the B vs W murders would be (80+9), which would make it B on W = 80/(80+9)=90%

 

the actual % might be as high as he claims.  it might be as low as you claim.  but your method for disproving his claim is faulty.

Edited May 21, 2021 by 52-80

[Johnny Sack 8397]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You are one stupid motherfucker.  Who would you expect to be the victim of a crime, someone with relative wealth or relative poverty?

News flash:  97% of white offenders commit violent crime against . . . wait for it . . . white victims.

So it’s clear you no longer disagree that in a violent interaction between a white and a black, 90 percent of the time the white is the victim?  Because ten minutes ago you did   Glad r can move on   

I am making some progress with your pea-sized brain.  

[jimmyjazz 45512]

5 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

So it’s clear you no longer disagree that in a violent interaction between a white and a black, 90 percent of the time the white is the victim?  Because ten minutes ago you did   Glad r can move on   

I am making some progress with your pea-sized brain.  

You are doing a wonderful job convincing yourself that you are intelligent.

White Americans are far more likely the victim of violent crime, regardless of the race of the perpetrator.  There are obvious reasons for this.  Try harder.

[52-80 19066]

actual numbers from FBI 2018 murder report

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls

BoW total = 514

WoB total = 234

meaning of all W vs B murders, 69% were committed by Blacks, and 31% by Whites

 

(FBI publishes a hate crime lists, but only identifying by victim, and not offender vs victim)

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

11 minutes ago, Macklemore said:

I agree with you. What you are saying is reasonable and constructive. Systems and laws that are race neutral on their face, yet have a disparate impact on blacks need to be addressed like the example you brought up of different penalties for crack and powder cocaine. Same thing for the huge disparity in generational wealth, which is why I support reparations in the form of downpayment assistance so that the American dream of owning your own can be reality for those that suffered directly or from the aftereffects of redlining. What I find objectionable is that CRT, as weaponized, is designed to put Americans into 2 warring camps of oppressor/oppressed. If you are white, to be a true anti-racist "ally" it seems that you have to atone for your heritage and through a performative self-flagellation, where you are expected to say nothing good about our country, its founding or its heritage. CRT is infused with Marxism - an ideology responsible for the deaths of millions. Having your kids at a Christian school being indoctrinated by Marxist claptrap is intolerable considering the contempt Marxists have for Christianity. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa did it right. Statements and discussion of the horrors of apartheid and bringing those to justice. But the aim was reconciliation through restorative justice. That is what anti-racists should be pursuing instead, especially at a Christian school.

1. I don't know why we are talking about Christian schools. You made the choice to indoctrinate your kids in that system so you can control that problem. 

2. No one is asking anyone to do anything you have highlighted around atonement. That's pure projection. Maybe you need to understand why you feel that that is thrusted upon you because I view this (as a white privileged man) in that I need to adjust my worldview as it pertains to what my experience is vs those less fortunate, especially in terms of race. Then take that introspection and see if there is anything in my control that I can do to mitigate any unconscious biases in my daily life. That's it. If you do that, you are helping solve the issues. 

We're at a weird time in our lives where we lived before the internet. Where our singular experiences were what dictated what our reality was. Now we have so much more information that highlights issues not evident in our immediate orbit. You can either ignore this new information, or take it on so it's not a problem for our children. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

You are doing a wonderful job convincing yourself that you are intelligent.

White Americans are far more likely the victim of violent crime, regardless of the race of the perpetrator.  There are obvious reasons for this.  Try harder.

You got owned and made a fool out of yourself this time.  Accept it and learn from it.  

[jimmyjazz 45512]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

You got owned and made a fool out of yourself this time.  Accept it and learn from it.  

LMAO.  Let's look at the actual data:

White America:  76.3%

Black America:  13.4%

Ratio:  5.7X as many white Americans as black Americans.

 

80.7% of white murders were committed by white Americans

15.5% of white murders were committed by black Americans

Ratio:  5.2X

 

Funny how that closely aligns with the general population breakdown.  "Owned" my ass.

 

[Neonmoon 38127]

Math is hard

[El Diablo 4232]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

Yes I do.  If we want to have a legitimate conversation about race on a collective basis where we generalize people on race, then let's discuss violence.  Particularly interracial violence, where 90% of the time in a violent interaction between a white person and a black person the white person is the victim.  Maybe we should have our own version of "the talk".

Criminogenic conditions would be a good conversation. 

[CDAK 216]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

If all you've ever known is privilege, then equality feels like oppression. 

This is quippy and a good soundbite but I don't think it's reflective of what people are concerned about in K-12 schools.

Can School be ‘Antiracist’? A New Superintendent in Evanston, Ill., Has a Plan - WSJ

This school district outside Chicago prioritized in-person learning for black and brown kids, and special ed and LGBTQ+ kids. If you are white and straight, you learn remotely. If you're black or brown, you can come back to school. Is segregating kids by race and allowing them back in person based on their race what equality looks like and white people are just so used to privilege that it feels like oppression?

[wildcat09 29187]

Is anyone remotely surprised that Johnny has black crime stats at the ready?

[52-80 19066]

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

LMAO.  Let's look at the actual data:

White America:  76.3%

Black America:  13.4%

Ratio:  5.7X as many white Americans as black Americans.

 

80.7% of white murders were committed by white Americans

15.5% of white murders were committed by black Americans

Ratio:  5.2X

 

Funny how that closely aligns with the general population breakdown.  "Owned" my ass.

 

1. that's not what he claimed

2. youre comparing rate A on basis of overall population against rate B on basis of 1 subset of that population.. not quite proper

 

[jimmyjazz 45512]

1 minute ago, 52-80 said:

1. that's not what he claimed

2. youre comparing rate A on basis of overall population against rate B on basis of 1 subset of that population.. not quite proper

 

I'm saying his stats are skewed because they don't address the causal aspect of crime.  If we ascribe race to causality then we reach a flawed conclusion -- white Americans are victims of crime, whether perpetrated by white or black Americans, because they are ripe targets.  On the whole, they have more money and other assets than black Americans.  This is not hard to suss out.  The very fact that the ratios are very close to societal breakdown is telling.  Looking at large percentage differences between small numbers is risky.

Let's be honest:  JSack wants us to believe black Americans are far more racist and violent than white Americans.  Do you disagree?

[Helobious 9477]

You people are stupid. All of you. 
 

If there’s anything to “care” about in both your arguments, it’s only murders where race was a motivating factor. Which is largely unknowable to any confident degree, given the spottiness of hate crime charges. I’m Hispanic. Why should I give a shit if a black person killed a hispanic person in a drug deal gone bad or some domestic dispute, two of the most common causes of murder? If there were hordes of blacks killing hispanics for no reason that’d be a concern. But that’s not happening, and it doesn’t happen between any races in this country, no matter what Sack wants you to believe. 

[52-80 19066]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm saying his stats are skewed because they don't address the causal aspect of crime.  If we ascribe race to causality then we reach a flawed conclusion -- white Americans are victims of crime, whether perpetrated by white or black Americans, because they are ripe targets.  On the whole, they have more money and other assets than black Americans.  This is not hard to suss out.  The very fact that the ratios are very close to societal breakdown is telling.  Looking at large percentage differences between small numbers is risky.

Let's be honest:  JSack wants us to believe black Americans are far more racist and violent than white Americans.  Do you disagree?

agreed there is no causal aspect in the numbers.  just presenting the numbers in a sound manner.

absolutely the #1 correlation is economics.  has been, and will be, for the end of time.  just as there will always be some form of classism/tribalism/x'ism for perpetuity because in-group favoritism (sex, height, religion, occupation, alma mater, etc) is a natural character of human beings. 

im just not a fan of assuming race antagonism as a primary motivator for all the bad shit in the world...

[Captainant 27309]

22 minutes ago, CDAK said:

This is quippy and a good soundbite but I don't think it's reflective of what people are concerned about in K-12 schools.

Can School be ‘Antiracist’? A New Superintendent in Evanston, Ill., Has a Plan - WSJ

This school district outside Chicago prioritized in-person learning for black and brown kids, and special ed and LGBTQ+ kids. If you are white and straight, you learn remotely. If you're black or brown, you can come back to school. Is segregating kids by race and allowing them back in person based on their race what equality looks like and white people are just so used to privilege that it feels like oppression?

Can you copy/paste that article? From the first few paragraphs before the paywall there was no reference to different timelines to return to in-person depending on race. 

[Pancho 44358]

3 hours ago, CDAK said:

I'm not insisting that there are "CRT professors." I really don't care. "Professor," "doctor," "cosseted butterfly," whatever term you want to use is fine. This is tangential.

I thought CRT was prevalent in DEI initiatives, at least at my company. You say, "that's impossible, by definition DEI initiatives cannot be based on CRT." I think you're drawing too fine (and blurry) a distinction. But, I'll use "antiracism" in lieu of CRT going forward when discussing the basis for certain DEI initiatives if that's allowed by the professors.

 

You've been calling them CRT professors in nearly every post on this thread, and I've been telling you "no" for pages. 

And no, that's not what I said. I said CRT tells you the what and why and DEI initiatives are to solve for the problem that was data driven through the framework of CRT.  That does not mean DEI initiatives come from CRT.  

And not all DEI initiatives are the same. Those initiatives are really based on the experiences by people at your company and the culture your company/institution has. 

[Sawbonz 27374]

10 minutes ago, Helobious said:

You people are stupid.

[52-80 19066]

of the 6570 single-race single-offender homicides reported by FBI in 2018

whites = 73% of overall population; 50% of all homicide victims (of which 81% are self-race inflicted); 46% of all homicide offender

blacks = 12.7% of overall population; 46% of all homicide victims (of which 89% are self-race inflicted); 48% of all homicide offender

 

on per capita basis (i.e. not race vs race), whites are less likely to be the killer, but also less likely to be killed.

on per capita basis (i.e. not race vs race), blacks are way more likely to be killers, but also way more likely to be killed.

and by and large, each are killing their own. 

 

its people living in the same geographies, in the same social groups, killing themselves.  its just economics.  theres no race wars (but there are plenty who wish otherwise...)