7 months ago
Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Obviously, anyone looking at her could immediately tell she's a Martian--from Venus.
Kamala's father is of Jamaican descent, while her mother is of Indian ancestry. She was born in Oakland, California in 1964.
None of this is new news, but all public record from day one.
Does it really matter whether she identifies as Indian, black, having borne a child, having had older/rich/powerful boyfriends when she was 29, etc.?
My goodness, talk about grasping for ANYTHING, in desperation, as a political weapon.
Republicans, behold your choice for president...and retch!
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Japan is a strict, highly regulated hierarchical society, which prizes collective harmony over individual rights. It's often used by societies who envy its low crime rate, to argue for stricter gun laws (firearms are restricted to police only) and cultural homogeny (Japan has little diversity), however both arguments massively oversimplify the reasons for Japan's low crime rate.
Interestingly, my father worked for a Japanese company and spent a lot of time there. He used to say that he couldn't understand how they managed to be world leaders in business when it took so long to drink a cup of tea.
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Japan is a strict, highly regulated hierarchical society, which prizes collective harmony over individual rights. It's often used by societies who envy its low crime rate, to argue for stricter gun laws (firearms are restricted to police only) and cultural homogeny (Japan has little diversity), however both arguments massively oversimplify the reasons for Japan's low crime rate.
Interestingly, my father worked for a Japanese company and spent a lot of time there. He used to say that he couldn't understand how they managed to be world leaders in business when it took so long to drink a cup of tea.
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Having just written a lengthy post on what's going on in my nation just now, I am not going to repeat it, here, however, some points that sort of relate.
It's interesting to read the statistics put forward by Banana and comments by Lance thereupon. As Lance has been rather fond of telling me, our demographic here has a lower percentage of blacks/Asian to ratio of whites.
Statistically, of course, this explains the much higher instances of white-on-white rape and murder.
Fundamentally, though, it cannot be denied that the reaction to rape and murder is different depending on who does it. Killings of children and mass murder are extremely rare in my country, but statistically, whites engaging in such activities far outweigh blacks/Asians (naturally, there are move of us)
However, as we can see now, after the horrific events of the recent child murders in Southport, our response is very different. When a white person kills, we blame the person. Sometimes, we extend that to include the police, if they haven't caught the person, etc. White killers tend also to be allowed the privilege of mental health issues, although this is not always the case.
When a person of colour kills (in the past, this would have included black people more, but the focus tends to lean more now towards those of Asian extraction, specifically of one religion), we blame the entire community. Individuals who never even met the killer are punished for simply 'looking the same'.
We don't afford other cultures the same rights to having good and bad people that we do our own. We will ignore our own abysmal record of paedophilia, for example, in favour of casting up the actions of some members of one community as indicative of the whole.
We think all our problems will be solved by removing certain people. We thought that of the Windrush generation, the Bangladeshi influx and today it's the Muslims. And so it goes. Anyone 'other' because it's easier than looking at ourselves.
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Having just written a lengthy post on what's going on in my nation just now, I am not going to repeat it, here, however, some points that sort of relate.
It's interesting to read the statistics put forward by Banana and comments by Lance thereupon. As Lance has been rather fond of telling me, our demographic here has a lower percentage of blacks/Asian to ratio of whites.
Statistically, of course, this explains the much higher instances of white-on-white rape and murder.
Fundamentally, though, it cannot be denied that the reaction to rape and murder is different depending on who does it. Killings of children and mass murder are extremely rare in my country, but statistically, whites engaging in such activities far outweigh blacks/Asians (naturally, there are move of us)
However, as we can see now, after the horrific events of the recent child murders in Southport, our response is very different. When a white person kills, we blame the person. Sometimes, we extend that to include the police, if they haven't caught the person, etc. White killers tend also to be allowed the privilege of mental health issues, although this is not always the case.
When a person of colour kills (in the past, this would have included black people more, but the focus tends to lean more now towards those of Asian extraction, specifically of one religion), we blame the entire community. Individuals who never even met the killer are punished for simply 'looking the same'.
We don't afford other cultures the same rights to having good and bad people that we do our own. We will ignore our own abysmal record of paedophilia, for example, in favour of casting up the actions of some members of one community as indicative of the whole.
We think all our problems will be solved by removing certain people. We thought that of the Windrush generation, the Bangladeshi influx and today it's the Muslims. And so it goes. Anyone 'other' because it's easier than looking at ourselves.
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
I'm afraid I need to repeat myself. I said just a bit ago that it's not your skin color that makes you violent. I also said that given a random white person and a random black person in America meeting, the black person is 49x more likely to kill the white person than vice versa. Crossing the road to avoid an encounter with someone in a Black neighborhood and switching traffic lanes to avoid being in one adjacent to a young Black driver are protective measures that I take regularly. There is a thin line between fear and rage when you live this every day.
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
I'm afraid I need to repeat myself. I said just a bit ago that it's not your skin color that makes you violent. I also said that given a random white person and a random black person in America meeting, the black person is 49x more likely to kill the white person than vice versa. Crossing the road to avoid an encounter with someone in a Black neighborhood and switching traffic lanes to avoid being in one adjacent to a young Black driver are protective measures that I take regularly. There is a thin line between fear and rage when you live this every day.
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
I've agreed that blacks kill whites at higher rates than vice versa, but 49 times more likely seems incredibly high. The numbers I've seen show a significant disparity, but not 49 times.
How did you come up with that number?
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
I've agreed that blacks kill whites at higher rates than vice versa, but 49 times more likely seems incredibly high. The numbers I've seen show a significant disparity, but not 49 times.
How did you come up with that number?
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Message edited: 7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Message edited: 7 months ago
I took the murders of black people by white people, relative to the total white population
verses the murders of white people by black people, relative to the total black population
it's been a while since I did the analysis so not sure what year and stat I used at the time. For 2019 FBI data I just looked up, that ratio is 18 to 1. It got worse during Covid.
anyway if you think that ratio is insane, try Blacks vs. Asians. (However, if you factor Chinese fentanyl, China has a pretty good kill rate on all of us)
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
I was using the FBI numbers from 2019, too, which is why I questioned the ratio of 49 to 1.
I computed the ratio as you did and got a ratio of
13 to 1. I won't quibble over the difference, though.
Just out of curiosity, are we dealing with the same raw numbers:
Blacks killed by whites: 246
Whites killed by blacks: 566
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
I was using the FBI numbers from 2019, too, which is why I questioned the ratio of 49 to 1.
I computed the ratio as you did and got a ratio of
13 to 1. I won't quibble over the difference, though.
Just out of curiosity, are we dealing with the same raw numbers:
Blacks killed by whites: 246
Whites killed by blacks: 566
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Yes. The differences are likely regarding the total populations. I did not do any detailed lookup on this and simply asked Google, which told me: 34.4 million Black people, and 275 million White people. I think that 34 million is wrong though. I thought it was closer to 50 million, which is much closer to the number necessary to make Black people 12.5% of the US population.
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Yes. The differences are likely regarding the total populations. I did not do any detailed lookup on this and simply asked Google, which told me: 34.4 million Black people, and 275 million White people. I think that 34 million is wrong though. I thought it was closer to 50 million, which is much closer to the number necessary to make Black people 12.5% of the US population.
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Yes, that does account for it. The population numbers I used where: 42 million Blacks, 235 million Whites.
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Yes, that does account for it. The population numbers I used where: 42 million Blacks, 235 million Whites.
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Message edited: 7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Message edited: 7 months ago
One of the obvious things that makes getting "clean" statistics on race is that racial mixing becomes increasingly prevalent with time, "muddying the water". This is as infuriating to white nationalists as it is amusing to mixed-race kids. The only thing that Jamaican or Haitian engineer immigrants have in common with American blacks in poor neighborhoods is the box they have to check on pages.
Connecting this to the original topic: while she can identify as whatever she likes, it's ludicrous for a privileged person like Kamala to be speaking on behalf of the experience of poor Black people. When she tries to do that, it's fair game for her to be attacked on the basis of her identity. However it might not be the best attack in Trump's playbook, when all he has to do is change his words a bit and say that her policies don't work because she doesn't actually know poor communities or care about them.
Remember that Trump gains nothing at all for courting the votes of Black women. Black women are consistently the most partisan voters in the country and even if Trump doubled his showing with that group, it would do nothing for him. It's Black men who are defecting to him, and they are far more open to Trump's straight talk about DEI and how little it has done for them.
7 months ago
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Of course, the issue with statistics is the old, 'lies,l damn lies and statistics'. They don't tell the whole story in either direction.
For example, let's say instances of black on white rape crimes are up. That doesn't take into account certain things. It is only ever a stat of numbers convicted. Not numbers committing crimes. It may be (and I don't say it is, this specific example isn't something I have the numbers on) that people are more likely to report crimes of rape if a person of colour is involved, based on likelihood of conviction. In the interests of parity, this can work the other way, people less likely to prosecute for fear of allegations of racism. Either way, stats don't tell the whole story.
Certainly in my own country (and I speak of my country only, here) there has recently been an element of racial tension driving sentences and reporting in one direction.
When it comes to certain crimes, it becomes very hard to judge based on conviction rates even comparisons with past numbers. In rape and paedophilia, for example, cases from 40 + years ago are coming to light now that simply weren't reported. Historical cases will add significantly to stats, but may not count against the past so we can, to a degree, live still in the rose-tinted spectacles nostalgia of an era where much less happened. This can be used as a race-baiting device - trouble only started when etc, etc. of course, on the UK this isn't just about POC, it's also connected with white immigrants from other European countries.
But looking at a period in time purely through stats ignores certain prevalent cultures of the age. It was far less common for women, regardless of ethnicity to report rape. It was notoriously difficult to get a conviction, and that's only improved recently. Children, similarly, were less likely to report abuse in,l for example, the decade I was born in. Hence the glut of historical cases. The law did not tend to favour victims where there were no witnesses, which was most cases.
It's very difficult,l except with the really prominent cases, to truly get absolute statistical accuracy, even with murder. There have been wrongful arrests, which advances in DNA use have rectified to an extent, missing data,l deliberately hidden data. It's very easy to fall into a simplistic trap of, 'weren't things better when there were fewer people from other countries', not least because those making such claims usually aren't aware that we weren't quite as white as we think in the past.
Whilst Simian is accurate to draw upon the difference between Jamaican engineers etc in the States Vs elsewhere, it does not change the fact that, despite most immigrants from the West Indies of the Windrush generation in the UK being invited to the UK, they were treated with more suspicion that we now care to admit, and pretty much the attitude was that any rise in crime had a convenient scapegoat.
It's an old pattern, not limited to race but also inclusive of class. Working classes were at the time, used to being held responsible for crime rates and generally suffering higher punishment for crimes committed than the equivalent of those in higher classes (skewed stats again, no upper and middles committed as many crimes statistically because they weren't convicted, owing to being able to pay off the victims/get sent abroad till the fuss died down). Those working classes now had the opportunity to pass the buck down to an 'other' in a way they hadn't before.
So, the relationship between the working class and immigrants has always been a tense one in some respects. Immigrants who did well were regarded with suspicion and a certain level.of resentment. Those that did not were viewed as a problem to the state.
Life was hard for West Indians in the UK in the sixties, but arguably not as hard as it might have been in the US in certain states at that time. We never had anything like the Jim Crow laws, for eg. Nevertheless, the tension was there, and has been replicated with different groups both before (Jews in particular) and since (Asians and Eastern Europeans). The problems run deeper than colour/race/religion in that they are still rooted in the class system we have never really fully let go of, despite the modern notion of 'classless' England,l usually touted by middles and uppers, who discount class prejudice in the same way others discount racial and gender prejudice. If you ain't living it, it ain't happening.
RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Of course, the issue with statistics is the old, 'lies,l damn lies and statistics'. They don't tell the whole story in either direction.
For example, let's say instances of black on white rape crimes are up. That doesn't take into account certain things. It is only ever a stat of numbers convicted. Not numbers committing crimes. It may be (and I don't say it is, this specific example isn't something I have the numbers on) that people are more likely to report crimes of rape if a person of colour is involved, based on likelihood of conviction. In the interests of parity, this can work the other way, people less likely to prosecute for fear of allegations of racism. Either way, stats don't tell the whole story.
Certainly in my own country (and I speak of my country only, here) there has recently been an element of racial tension driving sentences and reporting in one direction.
When it comes to certain crimes, it becomes very hard to judge based on conviction rates even comparisons with past numbers. In rape and paedophilia, for example, cases from 40 + years ago are coming to light now that simply weren't reported. Historical cases will add significantly to stats, but may not count against the past so we can, to a degree, live still in the rose-tinted spectacles nostalgia of an era where much less happened. This can be used as a race-baiting device - trouble only started when etc, etc. of course, on the UK this isn't just about POC, it's also connected with white immigrants from other European countries.
But looking at a period in time purely through stats ignores certain prevalent cultures of the age. It was far less common for women, regardless of ethnicity to report rape. It was notoriously difficult to get a conviction, and that's only improved recently. Children, similarly, were less likely to report abuse in,l for example, the decade I was born in. Hence the glut of historical cases. The law did not tend to favour victims where there were no witnesses, which was most cases.
It's very difficult,l except with the really prominent cases, to truly get absolute statistical accuracy, even with murder. There have been wrongful arrests, which advances in DNA use have rectified to an extent, missing data,l deliberately hidden data. It's very easy to fall into a simplistic trap of, 'weren't things better when there were fewer people from other countries', not least because those making such claims usually aren't aware that we weren't quite as white as we think in the past.
Whilst Simian is accurate to draw upon the difference between Jamaican engineers etc in the States Vs elsewhere, it does not change the fact that, despite most immigrants from the West Indies of the Windrush generation in the UK being invited to the UK, they were treated with more suspicion that we now care to admit, and pretty much the attitude was that any rise in crime had a convenient scapegoat.
It's an old pattern, not limited to race but also inclusive of class. Working classes were at the time, used to being held responsible for crime rates and generally suffering higher punishment for crimes committed than the equivalent of those in higher classes (skewed stats again, no upper and middles committed as many crimes statistically because they weren't convicted, owing to being able to pay off the victims/get sent abroad till the fuss died down). Those working classes now had the opportunity to pass the buck down to an 'other' in a way they hadn't before.
So, the relationship between the working class and immigrants has always been a tense one in some respects. Immigrants who did well were regarded with suspicion and a certain level.of resentment. Those that did not were viewed as a problem to the state.
Life was hard for West Indians in the UK in the sixties, but arguably not as hard as it might have been in the US in certain states at that time. We never had anything like the Jim Crow laws, for eg. Nevertheless, the tension was there, and has been replicated with different groups both before (Jews in particular) and since (Asians and Eastern Europeans). The problems run deeper than colour/race/religion in that they are still rooted in the class system we have never really fully let go of, despite the modern notion of 'classless' England,l usually touted by middles and uppers, who discount class prejudice in the same way others discount racial and gender prejudice. If you ain't living it, it ain't happening.
-1- 2 3 4 5 6
