Is Systemic or Institutional Racism still a thing?

When it comes to "equity," the less information the better.

 

Here you go Edna.....this touches on giving black students preference over whites. No denying.....race based preference is racist! Another truth along with my other bizarre beliefs! https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Affirmative+Action+in+Education&&view=detail&mid=7F15E26E7114B0CD4F4E7F15E26E7114B0CD4F4E&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=/videos/search?q=Affirmative+Action+in+Education&Form=VDRSCL&=0 You know Trump had a record number of blacks voting for him in 2016 and an even greater number in 2020. They are peeling away from the government plantation!

 

Racism is so bad in the likes of the US and UK, that blacks still emigrate there. And racism is so bad in the likes of the US and the UK, that blacks don't want to move back to a black country.

And what we have in play is, if you're black, use the race card because we're constantly told we're racist.

 

Math tests made up of nothing other than numerical math equations to be solved, disfavor blacks and so is considered systemic racism under CRT. EVEN when those tests are "designed" to evaluate the students understanding of mathematics.

You dont understand CRT. The intent it was designed with is irrelevant. If it produces disparate racial impacts it is by definition systemic racism according to CRT.

For example-

. “Every policy in every institution in every community in every nation is producing or sustaining either racial inequity or equity,” Kendi proclaims, defining the former as racist policies and the latter as antiracist ones.

Every policy? That question was posed to Kendi by Vox cofounder Ezra Klein, who gave the hypothetical example of a capital-gains tax cut. Most of us think of the capital-gains tax, if we think about it at all, as a policy that is neutral as regards questions of race or racism. But given that blacks are underrepresented among stockowners, Klein asked, would it be racist to support a capital-gains tax cut? “Yes,” Kendi answered, without hesitation.
“How To Be An Antiracist” is Wrong on its Facts and in its Assumptions. (city-journal.org)

Thats why we have this defund the police movement. Enforcing criminal law has a disparate impact upon blacks, so they believe the police must be defunded.

 

So you would call giving Native Americans in the four corners who live in poverty and have low admission rates to colleges a hand
up with scholarships and admission preferences to trade schools racist?
Yes, Trump gamed a lot of fools and suckers.

It's a cost benefit calculation. The benefits outweigh the cost.

"But nowhere have I written that the racial gap is racist: The policies and practices causing the racial gap are racist. Nowhere have I stated that any intellectual explanation of the existence of a racial gap is racist. Only intellectual explanations of a racial gap that point to the superiority or inferiority of a racial group are racist." -Kendi
Here is an answer to his critics if you want to be evenhanded. I won't hold my breath.

That response may be a little too nuanced for you to get, but I agree and it is what I've been saying. I don't agree with every soundbite coming from Kendi and he is hardly the national spokesman for the Black community but the Black community agrees racism is still a problem. The right labels anything done to make amends "CRT" and gets hysterical, as seen at school board meetings.

 

If it gives them access to things they did not earn and limits access to those who did earn it solely based on race, it most definitely is racist. Literally by definition it’s racist.

 

It’s definitely about benefits lmao

 

You need to read Thomas Sowell’s “Black Rednecks And White Liberals” it would do you a world of good

 

Yeah, so its not the disparity in math test scores that is racist, it is the policy of using the math tests that is racist. No one claimed otherwise.
And Kendi is a spokesperson for CRT.

 

And the irony is that by definition under CRT, what you say by definition is "racist", CRT says by definition it is "anti-racist".

 

That’s not funny at all. CRT redefines things to fit their agenda. That agenda is oppress whites and make them think they are racists

 

They can argue as much as they want. Judges have ruled three times this year alone that democrat policies were racist and anti constitutional for being discriminatory. Democrats are the true racists in America

 

Yep. They have an agenda.
Max Horkheimer first defined critical theory (German: Kritische Theorie) in his 1937 essay "Traditional and Critical Theory", as a social theory oriented toward critiquing and changing society as a whole, in contrast to traditional theory oriented only toward understanding or explaining it. Wanting to distinguish critical theory as a radical, emancipatory form of Marxist philosophy.

 

I was afraid that might whiz by. The disparity in math scores is not racist. How the student got there is. Culture plays a part without denial. Why the culture got the way it is is a result of past experience, which is a combination of a lack of a scholarly tradition due to slavery and a history of suppression of academic advancement. Also underfunding of black urban schools because of the system of school funding based on property taxes. Suburban schools, better funded, have the best teachers and the latest equipment.

Take the SAT as an example. I and my parents didn't know you can take the test as many times as you want for $55 a pop. Upper class parents learn that from their peers and it is suggested to be tutored at $25/hr. prior to the test and some guarantee 120 to 180 point improvement.

"CRT" has become right-wing code for any effort by business or schools to tell the true history of the US or attempts to combat racism and make people aware of the problem, which the right denies the exist of, unless of course if it is the imagined racism directed at them.

 

Thats what I just said. I'll wait here while you scamper about looking for your next strawman.

Math tests of blacks and whites IN THE SAME SCHOOL show the racial disparity. When I went to law school in the late 80s CRT was the new fad. Blacks in the one single law school were twice as likely to drop out before completion and 4 times as likely to fail the bar exam. And they still blamed it upon white supremacy.

Here is some of what you call "true history" taught to grade schoolers.

 

This "people of colour" term needs to die. It is racist. I'm not "of colour" because my skin shade isn't the same as yours. I'm just me. We are both individuals and should both be treated with equal respect, and nothing should be presumed about us because she share a skin tone with anybody else.

 

No, you still don't get it. It's not what you said. The effects of racism comes before they take the test as I attempted to explain. It seems you are blaming their poor performance on racial inferiority. Is that the case?

This (white) woman's book, is one book that even liberals think is wrong and have criticized. Do you agree with every right-winger. BTW this is not "CRT".

 

Yes, it does.

The federal poverty level is an exercise in manipulative mathematics.

A federal poverty level would be valid if the US were Iceland with a population of 379,000 and a uniform Cost-of-Living.

Why? Because you don't vote or because you vote for all the wrong candidates?

 

I always vote and I always vote for the correct candidate. Politics is the art of the achievable and what you suggest simply isn't in the cards.

 

You call it inferiority, I would call a difference. The racial disparity in math tests is greater between whites and asians, than it is between whites and blacks. The Asian/ white disparity is not due to racism against whites and neither is the black/ white disparity due to racism against whites.

This book is recommended in school districts across the country as part of the curriculum and includes the basic assumptions of CRT. Only the connection to satan is relatively unique.

 

Feel free to counter with any unmanufactured facts that you might have.

Because I'm educated and know that the definition of racism is the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

I would attempt to translate that into Ebonics for you, but I don't know how.

Refusing to grant a loan to an individual on the basis of poor credit-worthiness is not racist, but it is common business sense.

The government? You mean Democrats. Specifically the Democrat-controlled House and the Democrat-controlled Senate and the Democrat Presidents, FDR and Truman, right?

Well, why didn't you say so?

Your false beliefs are very false, probably because you don't know what you're talking about and you succumb to Liberal Göbbelizing.

Let's start small.

The redlining map is a myth.

The FHA never created the so-called redlining map. That was another federal creature called the HOLC.

The purpose of the HOLC during its short life-span --it was created in 1933 and died sometime in the early 1950s -- was to help home-owners who fell behind on their mortgages through no fault of their own.

It was HOLC who drew the maps. It is a fact that HOLC refinanced the mortgages of Blacks and Whites. In some areas, HOLC refinanced more Black homes than White homes, even though Blacks are a smaller percentage of the population.

Not only that, but in Philadelphia, 60% of HOLC's loans went to homes in the red-lined areas.

So, that myth is busted.

Let's look at the FHA.

The FHA's original mission was financing new homes for first-time buyers.

Why would the government do that? Well, is there a difference between a new and existing home?

Yeah, absolutely. What do you do for an existing home? Nothing.

What do you do for a new home? Construction workers don't exist in a vacuum. They buy things from businesses that buy things from businesses that buy things from other businesses that buy things from the businesses that obtain the raw materials/resources.

Can you not see how that would spur the economy?

And quotas designating homes be for certain groups are bad. Period. If you establish a quota and violate the Laws of Economics you suffer. Period. Not tomorrow or next month or next year (although that may be possible) but suffer you will and you cannot stop the suffering, except by further violations of the Laws of Economics that will cause even more widespread suffering. You just have to suffer until the suffering ends (and it will end when the government stops violating the Laws of Economics.)

It was later that the FHA started lending money for existing homes.

We need to understand that process.

The classical view was that a neighborhood/housing market (there are 120,000+ now in the US) had a life cycle. New homes were built, the neighborhood grew/developed and then about 40 years later -- more or less one generation -- the neighborhood started to decline.

Because that was the view, private banks and the FHA would not give loans to housing markets in decline.

That's just common sense, right? Because banks wanna stay open and they can't stay open if they're making bad loans, and a loan is bad if I lend you $12,000 to buy a home in 1955 if I know/have reason to believe, the home will only be valued at $6,000-$8,000 in 10, 12 or 15 years, because if you default, then I lose my shirt.

That all changed in the 1990s thanks to the Clinton Administration's focus on household income.

You can read Democrat Senator Lloyd Bentsen's remarks about it.

Banks would be penalized and harassed if they failed to make enough loans to the "right people" and so under coercion and duress, banks started making risky loans.

When banks figured out it wouldn't be too long before people would know them and investors would flee, they got financial wizards to craft Collateralized Debt Obligations aka CDOs that and started selling them to dump all their risky loans.

CDO's were like the hot potato game. They kept getting passed around and whoever had the hot potato when the music stopped got screwed (but that was not the cause of the Great Recession.)

I'm not saying the banks were innocent, because a handful of banks pushed the envelope, but that's what happens when you violate the Laws of Economics.

Anyway, the FHA had its own maps. Wanna see them? Well, a lotta people wanna see them, but they ain't, because when a discrimination lawsuit was filed against the FHA, they destroyed those maps. That was around 1969 or so.

The FHA also destroyed records of the locations of loans it insured. What I find astonishing is that it took researchers so damn long to figure out that the function of a county recorder's office is to record mortgages (and deeds) and that you can search through recorded mortgages to find loans backed by the FHA.

Before you get Medieval on the FHA, you need to understand you have access to a 30-year mortgage only because of the FHA.

Before the FHA, your options were 1, 3, 5 and 15 year mortgages. Why? I already covered that. The banks wanted the mortgage paid off before housing values start declining.

It is a fact that neighborhoods in transition -- meaning Blacks, Hispanics, Italians, other Latinos, Greeks, Slavs, Irish started moving in -- property values declined.

That fact is proven by dozens of different researchers looking at property values that did decline due to transition from 1920 to the present.

That isn't racism. The job of an appraiser is to assess the current and future value of property, and if the value is declining, they cannot lie and say it isn't.

Declining home values are largely a Supply/Demand issue. Why would a White person with a car -- very important -- want to live in an inner-city neighborhood or the first urban ring, when they can get a spiffy new home in the first suburban ring backed by the FHA?

People like to hang out with their own kind, and there's nothing racist about that.

It's no more racist than the American Blacks at Tangeman Center on UC's campus refusing to hang with the African brothers, and no more racist than the American Blacks at Kahn's (where I was a 2nd shift supervisor) refusing to hang with the Blacks from Senegal and Ghana, and no more racist than Peruvians who dis Guatemalans who dis Dominicans who dis Cubans who dis Mexicans.

Anyway, claims that the FHA are racist are even more absurd given that the FHA is not human and has no feelings and cannot discriminate.

On the other hand. the Whites appointed by Democrats to run the FHA were probably racist given it was 1930s-1950s America.

 

You do know that a large segment of the Indian Population has left the rez and has assimilated into American culture? Having worked in that area on Navajo Homes, and supported a program "Widows Mite" that helped them with food and clothing, I will say this......any program that gives support to ANY race to the exclusion of others, is racist! Do you believe Asians should be penalized for their superiority in academics???? Huuuuuuh?

 

Your example was that if blacks and whites with equal schooling, blacks will perform inferior to whites. You can dance around calling it a "difference", but you are pointing to an inferiority based on race. There is a little more to it than that. There is income and availability of resources, life stressors, parental level of education, culture, parental supervision, life priorities, peer influence.....and that goes for all races, it ain't as simple as you make it.

The author recommends the book to school districts across the country.

 

By your answer to why you think redlining is not racist I would say you don't seem to know what the definition is.

Redlining is the practice of denying a creditworthy applicant a loan for housing in a certain neighborhood even though the applicant may otherwise be eligible for the loan. The term refers to the presumed practice of mortgage lenders of drawing red lines around portions of a map to indicate areas or neighborhoods in which they do not want to make loans.

You (at great length) go on to admit there was segregation by race and the FHA was racist.

You might want to study this:
https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/supmanual/cch/fair_lend_fhact.pdf

https://www.governing.com/context/redlining-didnt-happen-quite-the-way-we-thought-it-did

 

So charity is okay for you to give to that certain demographic, but its not okay for the government to give a supportive program to that certain needy demographic because that's racist??? Huuuuuh?