• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair

Status
Not open for further replies.
AntraxSuicide said:
I benefit from social diversity because I value that in itself. For me personally (and the people I'm talking about in these political groups), criminal justice reform isn't that big a deal. No one there would have much interaction with that system, outside of maybe weed charges.

And yes, white women exist and a large number of those things will benefit them. But I'm talking about people like me; I'm socially privileged across almost every demographic slice, as are the people I'm talking about. I don't mean this as a broad brush situation. Just a feeling I've had at some of these groups.
Click to expand...

Privilege doesn't make doesn't make you immune to unfair police practices. It heavily goes into the White Americans favor, but isn't going to stop it completely from happening. Body cameras for instance would ideally make sure the police officer isn't going to harass you if he is being recorded.
 
Barzul said:
Trump and Kushner backing McMaster

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/...es.html?referer=https://t.co/pZrt69h6WC?amp=1
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
AntraxSuicide said:
But how about affirmative action?
Click to expand...
Affirmative action just means "make an effort and show progress". Affirmative action, as it exists today in the United States, passed with 70% approval from Americans during the Johnson administration. It exists as law, today, under Title VII, so, let me rephrase by asking, what is a concrete thing that doesn't already exist and is a policy goal of social justice that "white dudes" are not going to get behind because it forces them to lose something?
 
Wilsongt said:
What did McMaster do?
Click to expand...

He fired some conservatives in the NSC. Even though I still want Trump to go down in shame and hopefully serve time for his crimes, I'd be ok with him continuing to go against the Republican agenda for a while, at long as doing so doesn't put the country at even more risk than we're used to.
 
Spoiled Milk said:
Affirmative action just means "make an effort and show progress". Affirmative action, as it exists today in the United States, passed with 70% approval from Americans during the Johnson administration. It exists as law, today, under Title VII, so, let me rephrase by asking, what is a concrete thing that doesn't already exist and is a policy goal of social justice that "white dudes" are not going to get behind because it forces them to lose something?
Click to expand...

Would reparations count?
 
Spoiled Milk said:
Affirmative action just means "make an effort and show progress". Affirmative action, as it exists today in the United States, passed with 70% approval from Americans during the Johnson administration. It exists as law, today, under Title VII, so, let me rephrase by asking, what is a concrete thing that doesn't already exist and is a policy goal of social justice that "white dudes" are not going to get behind because it forces them to lose something?
Click to expand...

Affirmative action as it exists today is not enough, and is also under constant attack at both employers and educational institutes. So no, I don't think it fails to apply. How about reparations? That's a policy I support. Do you think that's popular among white men?
 
AntraxSuicide said:
I benefit from social diversity because I value that in itself. For me personally (and the people I'm talking about in these political groups), criminal justice reform isn't that big a deal. No one there would have much interaction with that system, outside of maybe weed charges.

And yes, white women exist and a large number of those things will benefit them. But I'm talking about people like me; I'm socially privileged across almost every demographic slice, as are the people I'm talking about. I don't mean this as a broad brush situation. Just a feeling I've had at some of these groups.
Click to expand...

Abinash117 said:
Privilege doesn't make doesn't make you immune to unfair police practices. It heavily goes into the White Americans favor, but isn't going to stop it completely from happening. Body cameras for instance would ideally make sure the police officer isn't going to harass you if he is being recorded.
Click to expand...

To illustrate this issue: police shoot more white people than black people on a yearly basis, but because black people only encompass 12% of the US population, and yet make up 40%-60% of victims of police shootings per year is where the problem lies. This is due to several factors, such as the ingrained racism of the officers/departments themselves, over-militaristic training, over-policing of minority-majority areas, the use of police as sources of revenue for local governments, the strength of police unions. Like, if police had the same density of patrols in minority-majority inner cities with statistically high crime in suburban and rural trailer parks with the same statically high crime, the percentage of police killings by ethnicity would be closer (although not an exact match to population percentage due to #1 and number #3 above and statistical noise) to their actual percentages in the total US population,

Point being that American police are too quick to shoot period. Obviously the particular impact on PoC deserves the most attention in this area, my point it should be a matter of concern to all citizens regardless of race. However, because of their privilege resulting in less police density, white ruralites and suburbanites don't feel the impact of individual police killings in their communities, and are therefore more likely to be disaffected from things like BLM. So, yeah, I guess main point being cops are basically just largely-racist thuggish tax collectors and being white doesn't guarantee you enough privilege to escape from that 100% of the time.
 
If the majority of the country agreed with reparations, they would not be needed.
But they are needed since the majority does not agree with them.


Also, quit trying to make Tina Turner a thing. It's not a thing.
 
What if the generals actually succeed in cleaning house of all the dipshits? Could this be... the pivot... at long last...
 
Spoiled Milk said:
Ok, let's have this conversation right now. Who quantifies how much should be given? Who receives reparations? Who pays them? Should Filipinos and Hawaiians and Native Americans get reparations too?
Click to expand...

What distinguishes these reparations from the reparations paid to the Japanese American community, for example? Of course the political will for it doesn't exist. But it sounds like you're skeptical of the administration of such a program - what would be more difficult to execute? The fact that there are no direct surviving victims?

It's not mutually exclusive from other policies that provide economic justice.
 
Spoiled Milk said:
Who quantifies how much should be given?
Click to expand...

I'd trust some experts who can estimate how much financial harm was done to various minority groups over time.

Who receives reparations?
Click to expand...

People who have been systematically abused for their demographic.

Who pays them?
Click to expand...

The US government with tax dollars.

Should Filipinos and Hawaiians and Native Americans get reparations too?
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
jtb said:
What distinguishes these reparations from the reparations paid to the Japanese American community? Of course the political will for it doesn't exist. But it sounds like you're skeptical of the administration of such a program - what would be more difficult to execute?

It's not mutually exclusive from other policies that provide economic justice.
Click to expand...
There were only 100,000 benefactors of internment reparations. They received $20,000 each. That cost the government $2 billion. And that's only the people who were directly interned. The money never went to the estates of deceased victims.

There are 37,000,000 African-Americans. A "reasonable" and by reasonable I mean back breaking expense would be something like $30billion in reparations. That's only $1,000 to every individual person. You're going to inflame racial tensions for a pittance?
 
Wilsongt said:
What did McMaster do?
Click to expand...

Trump finds him condescending (and he probably is, as Trump is very dumb and you can't help but talk down to him) and is annoyed that none of his plans about Afghanistan and ISIS are any different than what Obama had done or considered, because he can't be associated with anything Obama would do or consider.
 
Spoiled Milk said:
There were only 100,000 benefactors of internment reparations. They received $20,000 each. That cost the government $2 billion. And that's only the people who were directly interned. The money never went to the estates of deceased victims.

There are 37,000,000 African-Americans. A "reasonable" and by reasonable I mean back breaking expense would be something like $30billion in reparations. That's only $1,000 to every individual person. You're going to inflame racial tensions for a pittance?
Click to expand...

1. Yes

2. $1,000 is not a 'pittance' and that's pretty insulting to think otherwise.

Frankly, $20k for 37m African Americans seems totally reasonable at a $750b pricetag. How much did TARP cost? How much did the Bush tax cuts cost?

(Those are rhetorical questions. I know how much they cost.)

The average African American household has ~$7,000 in wealth. The average white household has $100k+. $20k is a meaningful sum of money regardless, but particularly within that context. Reparations are imperfect. What isn't?

White people may not realize it yet, but all they really want is to be able to write a check to absolve them of their guilt. Everyone wins.
 
Spoiled Milk said:
There were only 100,000 benefactors of internment reparations. They received $20,000 each. That cost the government $2 billion. And that's only the people who were directly interned. The money never went to the estates of deceased victims.

There are 37,000,000 African-Americans. A "reasonable" and by reasonable I mean back breaking expense would be something like $30billion in reparations. That's only $1,000 to every individual person. You're going to inflame racial tensions for a pittance?
Click to expand...

We've spent much more than this on a plane that doesn't fly well.
 
jtb said:
1. Yes

2. $1,000 is not a 'pittance' and that's pretty insulting to think otherwise.

Frankly, $20k for 37m African Americans seems totally reasonable at a $750b pricetag. How much did TARP cost? How much did the Bush tax cuts cost?

(Those are rhetorical questions. I know how much they cost.)

The average African American household has ~$7,000 in wealth. The average white household has $100k+. $20k is a meaningful sum of money regardless, but particularly within that context. Reparations are imperfect. What isn't?

White people may not realize it yet, but all they really want is to be able to write a check to absolve them of their guilt. Everyone wins.
Click to expand...

Glad you made that edit. I just about posted, "Um, 750m means each person gets $20."
 
AntraxSuicide said:
People who have been systematically abused for their demographic.
Click to expand...
Be more specific. What is "systematic abuse"?

The US government with tax dollars.
Click to expand...
So I have to pay a reparations tax to people I've never disenfranchised or abused? Why am I being held accountable? My white ancestors arrived here almost a hundred years after the Civil War. Also the most egregious crime is slavery, of which a minority of white people are responsible for. Shouldn't slave holding families pay more, directly, instead of distributing this restitution through the government? They still have the wealth, and the business, and the property to this day.

Black people are owed reparations for the injustices they have suffered for over 400 years but the price is too high and the best we can do is give economic justice to everyone and have affirmative hiring practices. Sorry.

Yes.
Click to expand...
All aboard the gravy train! My mother's family probably (I surmise by anecdote) employs something like slave labor on their hacienda (common in the Philippines) but somehow I'm still getting a check. What a waste of money. ;)
 
jtb said:
White people may not realize it yet, but all they really want is to be able to write a check to absolve them of their guilt. Everyone wins.
Click to expand...

Except many, maybe even a majority, of white people in this country don't actually feel any of that guilt. And the entire history of welfare in this country would indicate that very many whites plainly resent the idea of blacks getting 'free money' from the government.
 
Spoiled Milk, are you being intentionally disingenuous or not with your argument? I can't tell if you're propped up an idiotic strawman Fox News viewer that we're supposed to bat down or if this is your personal view.

Regardless, isn't this the answer to your question? The policy where social justice and leftism can't/don't intersect?

Blader said:
Except many, maybe even a majority, of white people in this country don't actually feel any of that guilt.
Click to expand...

Obviously there is no political will for a policy like reparations now or ever. The ship sailed with 40 acres and a mule.
 
jtb said:
Spoiled Milk, are you being intentionally disingenuous or not with your argument? I can't tell if you're propped up an idiotic strawman Fox News viewer that we're supposed to bat down or if this is your personal views.

Regardless, isn't this the answer to your question? The policy where social justice and leftism can't/don't intersect?
Click to expand...
I'm not being disingenuous and I don't know why you think I am.

It is the answer to my question, I just didn't realize there were so many advocates for reparations.
 
Suikoguy said:
If the majority of the country agreed with reparations, they would not be needed.
But they are needed since the majority does not agree with them.
Click to expand...

They're also impossible for the same reason. And would probably be counterproductive as they'd trigger a backlash that would make Trump's election look mild. But really, America paying widescale reparations is such a fantasy scenario that it'd take something like a foreign occupation for it to happen.
 
Spoiled Milk said:
Be more specific. What is "systematic abuse"?
Click to expand...

I'd probably let groups petition the government with cases alleging violations of human rights. The legal system seems to be the best approach to this by way of the courts. (Though I note the irony since these courts allowed such abuses in the past).

So I have to pay a reparations tax to people I've never disenfranchised or abused?
Click to expand...

Yes. A nation typically implies a level of communal responsibility. I don't keep to libertarian philosophy on this one.

Why am I being held accountable?
Click to expand...

You aren't, the United States is. Which you are a member of, and therefore send your tax dollars for the purposes of maintaining the obligations of the US government. Part of which is paying for shit we broke, so to speak.

My white ancestors arrived here almost a hundred years after the Civil War. Also the most egregious crime is slavery, of which a minority of white people are responsible for. Shouldn't slave holding families pay more, directly, instead of distributing this restitution through the government? They still have the wealth, and the business, and the property to this day.
Click to expand...

Good thing taxation is progressive, so that means these still-wealthy Confederate descendants will shoulder more of the burden. And while I agree with your line about slavery being the worst, I feel like you're minimizing a whole lot of other human rights abuses that we've dealt to people.

Black people are owed reparations for the injustices they have suffered for over 400 years but the price is too high and the best we can do is give economic justice to everyone and have affirmative hiring practices. Sorry.
Click to expand...

I just posted above that we've actually spent more money on a jet that can't fly correctly than your own quoted figure. A lot more, in fact, over the next few decades. Redirect that money and it's paid for.

As for "the best we can do," I obviously disagree.

All aboard the gravy train! My mother's family probably (I surmise by anecdote) employs something like slave labor on their hacienda (common in the Philippines) but somehow I'm still getting a check. What a waste of money. ;)
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand this part.
 
Spoiled Milk said:
I'm not being disingenuous and I don't know why you think I am.

It is the answer to my question, I just didn't realize there were so many advocates for reparations.
Click to expand...

Well, the part about your family being slaveowners was where I wasn't sure if we were venturing off into trolling or not since one moment you're paying for other people's reparations, the next you're receiving them despite owning slaves. Good to know you were just being disingenuous with that second part.

Having set that aside, your argument that you didn't own any slaves only makes sense if you believe that the social and economic structures that have created racial inequities in this country ended in 1865. Or, likewise, that you did not benefit from any racial inequities within society since 1865. Which I find to be a very unpersuasive claim.
 
Blader said:
Except many, maybe even a majority, of white people in this country don't actually feel any of that guilt. And the entire history of welfare in this country would indicate that very many whites plainly resent the idea of blacks getting 'free money' from the government.
Click to expand...

And yet, we still do welfare programs.

Political capital is a dead concept; just ram shit through and then if it was a good idea, it's harder to get it revoked later (hello, ACA!). If it was a bad idea, then you try to fix it as soon as you can.

I just fail to see how this would negatively affect the US.
 
AntraxSuicide said:
And yet, we still do welfare programs.

Political capital is a dead concept; just ram shit through and then if it was a good idea, it's harder to get it revoked later (hello, ACA!). If it was a bad idea, then you try to fix it as soon as you can.

I just fail to see how this would negatively affect the US.
Click to expand...

There is no scenario where Congress would ever vote on this. It's political death to even openly consider it. Democrats ramming this through is as plausible as a workers revolution sweeping this country and seizing the means of production.
 
Basileus777 said:
There is no scenario where Congress would ever vote on this. It's political death to even openly consider it.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between arguing whether it's a politically feasible idea and whether it's a good idea. I don't think anyone is under any illusions that reparations are an option. Racism is too deeply embedded into our country's fabric for that to ever happen.

Nonetheless, is it a good policy? Is it the morally right thing to do? etc.
 
jtb said:
There's a difference between arguing whether it's a politically feasible idea and whether it's a good idea. I don't think anyone is under any illusions that reparations are an option. Racism is too deeply embedded into our country's fabric for that to ever happen.

Nonetheless, is it a good policy? Is it the morally right thing to do? etc.
Click to expand...

The post I quoted was talking about how political capital isn't a thing and it could just be rammed through. As if it were easy and there wouldn't be catastrophic consequences for trying it.
 
Basileus777 said:
The post I quoted was talking about how political capital isn't a thing and it could just be rammed through.
Click to expand...

To be clear, it's probably not something you campaign heavily on to win control of Congress, like healthcare is. But once you're in office, yes, political capital means nothing. Pass good policy.
 
AntraxSuicide said:
To be clear, it's probably not something you campaign heavily on to win control of Congress, like healthcare is. But once you're in office, yes, political capital means nothing. Pass good policy.
Click to expand...

You must have been a real optimist for the Republicans getting everything they wanted done this year huh? Sorry, but whipping votes for terribly unpopular legislation that would create a red tsunami isn't so simple or easy. And there are a ton of consequences for what legislation a party passes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
The Crisis in Venezula
2
2K
God Enel replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.
397 398 399 400 401
20K
2M
ShadowSwordmaster replied
Top Bottom