MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Mississippi Sheriff's Department Gets Sued, ACLU Finds a Long 'White Pride' Email

New data show roadblocks in the county occur twice as often in black neighborhoods as white ones.

In the same Mississippi county that's currently being sued for running discriminatory, unconstitutional roadblocks in black neighborhoods, the now-sheriff forwarded a chain message about "white pride" containing a long list of racial slurs around the office.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Mississippi revealed the 2009 email, subject line "'White' Pride," in a tranche of exhibits that it says show a culture of casual discrimination and lax discipline. Current Madison County Sheriff Randy Tucker, who was elected in 2012, forwarded it to several of his Madison County colleagues.

The message is a sloppy chain message containing many common tropes among aggrieved white people, such as "How come there's no White History Month?"

Here's some of the lowlights:

Exhibit from Brown v. Madison CountyExhibit from Brown v. Madison County

Court filing in Brown v. Madison CountyCourt filing in Brown v. Madison County

Last year, the ACLU and the law firm of Simpson Thacher & Bartlett filed a class-action civil rights lawsuit against Madison County, alleging it has subjected its residents to more than a decade of brazenly illegal and discriminatory policing—warrantless home invasions, unconstitutional roadblocks that appear only in black neighborhoods, and aggressive "jump out" squads that target young black men doing nothing more than walking down the street.

At the roadblocks, deputies run licenses for outstanding warrants and court fines as well as look for probable cause to perform searches. They also in some cases stop pedestrians. The ACLU argues that setting up roadblocks for general crime control purposes violates the Fourth Amendment on its face, even without the added discriminatory element.

As Reason detailed in an investigation last year, black residents of Madison County, just north of the state capital of Jackson, have felt under siege from the local sheriff's department for generations, but they have been almost totally ignored by the county government.

"We've all had problems dealing with Madison County," Quinnetta Thomas, the wife of one of the suit's plaintiffs, told Reason. "My situation is one of the prime examples of how Madison County works. They stormed in and made us feel unsafe in our own home."

Thomas captured video of a Madison County sheriff's deputy with his hand around the neck of her husband, whose hands were handcuffed behind his back. According to Manning and Thomas, deputies barged into their home at 7 in the morning and demanded they sign a false witness statement about a nearby robbery.

In a press conference today, the ACLU of Mississippi and Simpson Thacher presented new statistical evidence showing black residents make up the bulk of arrests and citations issued by the Madison County Sheriff's Department.

Despite making up 38 percent of the population of the county, black residents accounted for 77 percent of all arrests, 76 percent of all arrests at roadblocks, and 72 percent of all citations.

The ACLU also says data turned over by the sheriff's department reveals that, on average, the per capita rate of police roadblocks in predominantly black census tracts in Madison County is double the rate in predominantly white census tracts.

"That data has been statistically studied and controlled for other factors, and we think it's overwhelming," Jonathan Youngwood, a lawyer at Simpson Thacher, said at the press conference.

In testimony from depositions in the case, several former sheriff's department employees said that they heard deputies using racial slurs and that the deputies in question were never disciplined.

One of the other documents turned over to the ACLU and Simpson Thacher is the template case sheet for the department's narcotics unit. All of the fields on the form are blank, except three that are automatically filled in: "black," "male," and "arrested."

Another one of the plaintiffs in the case, Lawrence Blackmon, says that when he asked the deputies at his door to show him a warrant, he was handcuffed and held at gunpoint in his apartment. They then allegedly searched his apartment from top to bottom, never producing a warrant.

"There is a toxic culture that allows for a suspect-first, citizen-second mentality among many deputies," Blackmon said at the press conference.

Sheriff Tucker told The Clarion-Ledger last May that his department intends to "vigorously fight" the lawsuit. "Our deputies are professional law enforcement officials who enforce Mississippi laws," he told the paper. "If a law is broken, appropriate action is taken regardless of the race of the one breaking said law. As always, we have fairly and diligently executed the duties for which we are required."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Racist cops in Mississippi? Say it ain't so.

  • Eidde||

    It's getting as bad as New York.

  • Eidde||

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    I figured you'd be the first to stand tall for Mississippi.

    Thanks for vindicating my sense of you.

  • Eidde||

    "as bad as New York" is not a compliment, genius.

  • Radioactive||

    how about ...YO MAMMA? that work for you?

  • AlgerHiss||

    Or Minnesota....or California...or New Jersey.

  • AlgerHiss||

    Or Minnesota....or California...or New Jersey.

  • Marty Feldman's Eyes||

    White fragility reminds me of christian fundies complaining about atheists. Your religion is practically a requirement for public office and in some parts of the country civic life, yet you're under seige. These guys can fuck with black people all they want with impunity, but they are somehow the victim. Pigs.

  • Mickey Rat||

    When there are policies that require racial preferences for non-whites in hiring or education slots, it does not matter what color tge ifgicialls making those rules are. When there are laws being proposed and enacted that would requre a medical professional to engage in acts they consider unethical, in part, due to their faith. That it is seroiusly argued that not performing such acts is imposing their religion on their patients, ot is difficult not to conclude that you are under siege.

  • Marty Feldman's Eyes||

    Clearly we have different definitions of "under siege".

  • Radioactive||

    like being under you? not only under siege but utterly disgusting as well

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    They're not pigs. They're just right-wing losers, the lessers of our society.

  • buybuydandavis||

    The Right won the last presidential election
    And the hits keep on coming

    So much winning!

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    That was after your betters beat you with a black guy -- twice -- and spent a half-century shoving great progress down your whining throats.

    As the electorate improves, those relying on rural, religious, white, backward, bigoted voters seem destined to take plenty of hits. Looking at you, Republicans!

    Carry on, clingers.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Keep Calm and Covfefe!

  • BillyG||

    Was that the half century where the D's were run by the KKK, caused double digit inflation, added the massive debt through the "great society" which hasn't lowered the poverty rate by ever 1%? Or the one where the R's were run by capitalists, cut inflation, and gave us a record 20 year bull run economy?

    Carry on, tyrant.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    You stick with bigotry, backwardness, superstition, ignorance, and can't-keep-up rural stretches depleted by generations of bright flight, Billy G.

    I'll continue to watch America progress in line with my general preferences, and the American electorate become less rural, less religious, less backward, less white, and less bigoted just about every day, with predictable consequences for Republicans, conservatives, and especially right-wingers masquerading as libertarians.

    Carry on, losers.

  • Bongo Supreme||

    Why are you on this website?

  • buybuydandavis||

    "That was after your betters beat you with a black guy"

    Half black guy.

    But I'll put you down under those who insist on the "One Drop Rule".

  • MarioLanza||

    White fragility? We are talking about white "pride". Why can't we ask the question: "If we can have Black pride, Hispanic pride, etc,, why not White pride?" Look at the accomplishments of whites, say starting with the computers that we are reading this on. Oh, but whites did everything on a history of exploitation and slavery. Bull. Even at the peak cotton in ante-bellum south, cotton represented on 5% of the GDP of the country and the great majority of cotton farms had no slaves. Slavery is simply irrelevant to the transistor, the microchip, the microwave, the light bulb,....

    Now, I am not going around pushing "white pride", though it would be easy to do. But there are loony academics that are pushing the "existential threats posed from whiteness". Push back on all those pushing this toxic identity politics is natural. People are sick of the hypocrisy of the left. They are sick of people demanding to be NOT judged for their poor character because of the color of their skin.

    Not advocating it but I understand it.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Why can't we ask the question: "If we can have Black pride, Hispanic pride, etc,, why not White pride?"

    There's a historical asymmetry here that makes it a little silly to ask that question.

    I remember when I was a kid and I asked my mom the smart-assed question: "There's a mother's day! How come there's no kids day??" Her reply, predictably, was "Because every other day is kids day!"

    Well, every other month is white history month. And every other privilege is white privilege. It's the default, just like how "kids day" is the default.

    That's not a defense of affirmative action (which I'm opposed to), but can't we at least acknowledge that racism is still alive and well, and as long as white people continue to occupy positions of power, the application of racism is going to be asymmetric?

  • mad_kalak||

    Well, then, given that logic, that historical asymmetry is all the more reason to be proud to be white, even if we don't give whites a day or week or month to celebrate it because they are so great and should know it already.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Nobody should be proud of the historical asymmetry I'm talking about.

  • mad_kalak||

    Why should a white man not be proud that the level of technology and civilization the entire world has achieved has, by better than half, has come from white men?

    If you do support the idea that such a historical asymmetry should be used for PRESENT or FUTURE oppression on non-whites, then white racial pride is not inherently wrong. It is not different than pride in one's country of origin, which will always have unseemly issues to the modern eye, no matter which country you are from. A Japanese man can be proud to be Japanese, even if Japan wasn't a good guy in WWII.

    Unless, of course, you believe those achievements have come only at the costs of non-whites (which is not the case).

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Why should a white man not be proud that the level of technology and civilization the entire world has achieved has, by better than half, has come from white men?

    Because you know perfectly well that's not what I'm talking about. When the question arises why "nigger" is a bigger insult than "honky" -- which is the issue here -- the historical context is the answer. When I said "historical asymmetry", that's what I meant.

  • mad_kalak||

    Of course I know perfectly well what you're talking about. Nigger is a bigger insult than honkey because one used to get hung from trees until dead while the other wasn't.

    But in asking you to clarify what is wrong with white pride when one doesn't subscribe to either white supremacy nor any form discrimination based on race, I'm trying to get you to see the logical and ideological inconsistency in such a position.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    You're reading way too much into some condemnation of "white pride" I didn't make. Like I said below, be proud all you want. You took the term "historical asymmetry" and generalized it to mean something I wasn't even talking about.

  • mad_kalak||

    Was I engaging in a bit of a reducto ad absurdum of your argument? Perhaps. But a universal declaration of condemnation of white pride is just as absurd, especially when in practicality its masked (or its proxy is) pride in the Founding Fathers, or the ancient Greeks, or Enlightenment thinkers, and so on.

  • ||

    And this is how underclasses are spawned and germinate.

  • mad_kalak||

    How so? I'm not seeing what you mean.

  • DarrenM||

    So, you're saying white pride is fine in those areas that are dominated by some other race.

  • mad_kalak||

    ...ooohhh, good point!

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Being proud of your team is fine when you're talking about the time your team did a good thing. Being proud of your team is not fine when you're talking about the time your team did a horrible thing. And when the Mississippi cops were talking about "nigger" and "jap", it became apparent what it was specifically they were talking about. Their question is rhetorical, but the answer is simple: those words have a specific meaning that harkens back to the systematic oppression of those groups. "Honky" and "whitey" have no such historical context.

  • BillyG||

    "Honky" and "whitey" have no such historical context.

    Or you just want to plain ignore the context. Check the definitions, if you can be bothered to read them.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "There's a historical asymmetry here that makes it a little silly to ask that question."

    I don't have an answer, so I will dismiss the question.

    " but can't we at least acknowledge that racism is still alive and well, and as long as white people continue to occupy positions of power, the application of racism is going to be asymmetric?"

    Certainly racism is alive and well. Antiwhite racism is thriving and growing.

    Institutional antiwhite racism in the form of antiwhite racial preferences and quotas have been with us for half a century. That whites instituted it and continue to support it does point to a rather pathological deep seated ingroup loathing in whites, which can be seen across Europe as well.

    Perhaps it will get better when white loathing whites are replaced with non-whites, but the trend on antiwhite hatred as the country has become less white is not encouraging in that regard.

  • Erik w||

    It's kinda stupid to take pride in anything that you're not responsible for, race etc included.

  • vek||

    Yeah, the hypocrisy of the "it's NOT okay to be white" crowd is insane. But it is obvious why they push it.

    Whites have the best case to make for ACTUALLY being the biggest badasses in the world. I would say East Asians are a near tie though. Basically the greatest civilization on earth at any given time has bounced back and forth between the Middle East, East Asia, and Europe. India may have had a time at the top about 8-12K years ago in pre history too though according to some recent finds. The best civ in the world was probably in Europe more of that time than not, but maybe Asia wins the cake. It's close.

    Either way Europeans have undoubtedly been at the top of the heap for 500 or more years without interruption.

    It's kind of like if the tall, good looking, brilliant person with an awesome personality in high school had run around telling everybody how fucking awesome they were... Everybody already knows it is true, but it's just being a dick to say it out loud.

    Since we're trying not to give less impressive cultures an even bigger inferiority complex, we can't be allowed to even occasionally mention how awesome we crackers are. It's dumb, but I get why some feel overshadowed... Because they are.

  • Mike d||

    "......Why can't we ask the question: "If we can have Black pride, Hispanic pride, etc,, why not White pride?"...."

    Well, two wrongs don't make a right. Ideally, NO ONE would be (excessively) proud of their racial heritage, save for skin deep "pride" holidays like St Patrick's or Cinco De Mayo Day. But, if one group of people decided to hold a PRIDE event, I would prefer it coming from an ethnicity that isn't the dominant one in society.

  • vek||

    On that last sentence, why? Why shouldn't the Chinese have Asian pride in China? It's an absurd notion, and is an insane double standard. It has only ever been applied to whites, and only even the last few decades for us. It's retarded. We're basically acting ashamed because our cultures have been the most successful in human history. We shouldn't be ashamed of that.

  • Mike d||

    1) At the risk of being a smart ass, but, **Asian** pride wouldn't work well in China anyway because the Chinese are super racist towards the Japanese and Koreans and therefore wouldn't want a generic holiday for all Asians. The same goes for the Japanese, who are super racist towards anyone not Japanese. So I am not some liberal SJW type whose afraid of political correctness that you normally write-off.

    2) As far as national pride (if you want to compare China vs the US) goes if you wanna compare; the 4th of July holiday isn't good enough for you?

    3) If you want a "white pride" holiday, is St Patrick's and Oktoberfest not good enough for you? I mean nobody checks IDs at St Patirck's parades making sure you're really Irish. Mexicans get to have their Cinco De Mayo (although the holiday is more of a US thing anyway), and I guess black people have Kwanzaa (although this "holiday" isn't all that big).

    So really, you're complaint is VERY SPECIFIC. You want a holiday that all whites get to share (meaning white people in EU countries AND white people in the US, so a more exclusive version of 4th of July doesn't count), but you don't want something watered down like "St Patrck's Day". You want an OPENLY white holiday, on par with Cinco De Mayo?

  • vek||

    1. I know that Asians are still more nationalistic than pan-Asian. That wasn't really what I meant when I said Asian pride.

    2. 4th of July is national. Although this used to basically be a celebration of America in general, but really a de facto "white people who kill Brits are awesome" day, it's de-ethnic-ized nowadays. Which is fine.

    3. Not my point which actually is...

    You mentioned a magical white pride event. I merely commented. I think it's a dumb idea actually, but it should be okay to have too, even if dumb.

    I'm talking more about day in day out it being okay for us to actually be proud of our country, our history, etc. You will literally get socially shunned nowadays if you say factual things about European countries being "better," EVEN IF you couch the statement with "during such and such time" or whatever.

    If I were even to say something that should be super benign and jokey like "Hell yeah I'm proud to be German! I mean we did invent the automobile, jet airplanes, rockets, start two world wars, and we have lederhosen too! What's not to like?" Some people would FLIP OUT.

    A white pride holiday is dumb, and not what I mean. I'm tired of being told it's not okay for me to be proud of my ancestors history, when everybody else is told to do just that. Double standards like this simply should not exist.

  • MikeHo||

    I think you are vastly underestimating the impact slavery had on the nineteenth century American economy. According to James McPherson the nearly 4 million American slaves were worth $3.5 billion, making them the largest single financial asset in the entire U.S. economy, worth more than all manufacturing and railroads combined. This amount was more the amount of money in circulation at the time. By 1840, 60% of the world's cotton was produced in the southern United States and 70% of the cotton in the British textile industry.

  • ace_m82||

    Your religion is practically a requirement for public office

    You said this AFTER Trump got elected? Odd choice...

  • Imissbuckley||

    I heard this on the last Fifth Column Podcast: "Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue."

    Trump despite his obvious lack piety or even general religious knowledge still paid lip service to Christian Values during the campaign, and his transactional relationship with them to appoint pro-life judges remains intact. So Trump's victory really hasn't ended the "political requirement to be religious" he's simply completed the work of previous politicians by finishing erasing the need to feign sincerity for those beliefs.

  • Mark22||

    White fragility reminds me ... These guys can fuck with black people all they want with impunity, but they are somehow the victim.

    Police can also fuck with white people all they want with impunity, and they do, to roughly the same degree they fuck with black people.

    In any case, I used to be sympathetic to the causes of racial minorities. Since I'm now demonized for my skin color, I don't care anymore: I don't support racists of any color.

  • vek||

    A black researcher at Harvard did an interesting study to prove white racism against blacks... He found results he didn't expect.

    I don't recall all the details, but basically whites were more likely to be assaulted or shot in many instances, and have other extremely negative outcomes than blacks. Basically blacks are either treated slightly better, or the same as whites in pretty much all circumstances. The only stat that shows badly is they do get in more interactions in the first place... But they're also more likely to be involved in crime, so it is obvious why they'd have more run ins.

    Google Harvard Black Crime Study or something if you want the details.

  • Dookert||

    Identifying a racial group with some unique kind of "fragility" seems rather racist to me. How about "black fragility", the tendency of black people to get defensive when questioned about the failings of their own community and immediately blame it on white fragility? Its a pointless and wholly ideological piece of rhetoric. Lastly, this instance in Mississippi is an outlier as far as a head law enforcement official sharing a racist email and that fact leading to racist policing policies. How do we know that? It is explicit and not just asserted, and it made the news.

  • sarcasmic||

    "There is a toxic culture that allows for a suspect-first, citizen-second mentality among many deputies," Blackmon said at the press conference.

    That attitude is not limited to Mississippi.

  • Zeb||

    Did I mention how much I hate identity politics?

    But I guess it's working so well for leftist assholes that right-wing assholes are going to get in on it too.

  • Microaggressor||

    I have been wondering about why Whites are racists, and no other race is...

    Gee whiz, how could they have got this idea? You'd think there was a concerted effort to sow racial division and turn idiots into actual white supremacists.

  • EscherEnigma||

    "going to get in on it"? I think your tense is off by a few decades.

  • Zeb||

    Yes, I'm sure it is. But with the recent focus on the "alt-right" it's really laid out for all to see.

  • Kivlor||

    Yeah, it's still pretty taboo in right wing politics to openly embrace identity politics. So I'm going to say Zeb's right about his verbiage.

    It is certainly moving that direction though. The inevitable response to what has been going on for longer than I've been alive.

  • Calidissident||

    I think the right, including the mainstream right, has made generous use of identity politics for a long time. Not necessarily in the same openly racial way of the left, but I would certainly count messaging about how Real America = small-town conservative (white) Christians as a form of identity politics. Identity goes beyond just race.

    Also, I while I agree that there's a reactionary element in the more recent uptick in explicit racial identity politics on the right, I don't think it makes sense to only look at that one way. A lot of the time people portray the left's actions as all occurring in a vacuum, and then the right's actions are explained as reactions to the left. Particularly in this case, I think it's more complicated to that. Left-wing identity politics wouldn't be a significant force if it wasn't for the entire history of discrimination and oppression based on the various aspects of identity. So in that sense left-wing identity politics is itself a reaction. I don't think you can view one as just a reaction and the other arising in a vacuum.

  • Microaggressor||

    You're right, and they tend to feed off of each other. Each side doubles down when they feel like they're being attacked. That fear is existential, e.g. "white genocide" vs "Hitler 2.0". There is historical precedence. Both sides become more authoritarian in their struggle for power to impose their preference and moral norms onto their country. Whoever wins, we lose. The left currently has the upper hand in most of the west, just look at the state of Britain. The thought control is getting really creepy. The harder they clamp down on the pressure cooker, the bigger the predictable explosion. They have no idea they are their own worst enemy.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "but I would certainly count messaging about how Real America = small-town conservative (white) Christians as a form of identity politics. Identity goes beyond just race."

    Identity by values and shared experience seems like a rather reasonable thing. Any race can be "small town conservative". The difference between identity that has correlation with race and that is *based* on race is huge.

    Racial identity politics is playing with plutonium. But if there is relentless mainstream "Whitey is the Devil" drumbeat, Whitey is going to get back in the game of conscious in group preference

    "Left-wing identity politics wouldn't be a significant force if it wasn't for the entire history of discrimination and oppression based"

    Notice how as time has gone whites have gotten less racist, while the Leftist hatred of them has grown over time?

    Meanwhile, right wing identity politics is making a comeback as the Left's hatred of Whitey has grown. That becomes a history too. Whites of my age and younger have lived with institutional antiwhite racism all their lives.

  • DarrenM||

    That becomes a history too.

    Very good point.

  • Dookert||

    Exactly, but nobody wants to hear that. They have an instant reaction against it, hence people throwing around the word "white fragility", a blatantly racist term if it was used against any other racial group. It is a silencing word, a word designed to put you intentionally on the defensive and then prove its point. Its like being the aggressor in an argument and then telling the object of your aggression to "calm down" or to "not be so sensitive". Its extremely manipulative and those who use it know it. Your last sentence "Meanwhile....." is 100% true and the rise of the Alt-Right is entirely associated with it, but to the left it doesn't matter and any inequities arising out of non "white" groups will continue to be blamed on them. It is a powder keg now almost exclusively driven by the left.

  • vek||

    I'm 32, and I'm sick and tired of the anti white racism.

    Frankly, racial issues ARE important. I think the current age shows that the human species will never transcend the natural inclination everybody has to be around people like themselves. People who ignore this fact are autistic idiots. It's biological, like our urge to fuck or take a dump. It can't be avoided. This is why people self segregate, even when they outwardly say they don't care about race.

    I'm pretty much totally fine with identity politics now. As far as I'm concerned white America has to crush the left, and inject a dose of reality into everybody's heads. Otherwise America, the last bastion of freedom in the world, is going to become a socialist hell hole with constant ethnic strife.

    My personal solution is to simply split the country into two. It's the most sensible, peaceful solution. If we don't, I'm 99% sure we're going to have a civil war in my lifetime. It will probably ostensibly be based along ideological lines, but in reality it is going to be a de facto race war, because that's basically how the ideology aspect plays out in the real world. White Americans are the only ones who believe in the traditional idea of America... I don't want to see that idea die.

  • MarioLanza||

    Sorry but no. Opposing "affirmative action" (what a pleasant euphemism for race based admissions) is not identity politics - unless you are a leftist. Pushing for a color blind society is not identity politics. It's the direct opposite, but the leftist will wail, "Wacists!!!". I know lots of small town white Christians - the so-called bitter clingers. They have no issues with Clarence Thomas if he was white or black. They would have issues with a Caucasian Barack Obama.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Pushing for a color blind society is not identity politics.

    It is when your argument is that whites should be looked upon favorably because they brought so many good things into the world. I'm not saying that you're doing this, but it's obvious that the people who the article is about are, and so are the people in the other article from yesterday about Penn Law School.

  • buybuydandavis||

    People point out the good that whites have done generally as a response to those villifying whites for injustices whites committed in the past.

    *If* we're going to do historical racial accounting, let's at least be accurate when doing it.

  • MBmb||

    In my view, pushing for a color blind society is never identity politics.

    I'm hard-pressed to accept the exception you are raising, because it's hard to conceive of "whites should be looked upon favorably because they brought so many good things into the world" as an argument in favor of a color-blind society to begin with. Are you sure anyone is using it this way, much less those people you brought up?

    I don't see how such an argument would work. "Due to the good things whites brought into the world, people should agree to a color-blind society". There's an unstated presumption here that whites are uniquely bad and need those "good things" to redeem themselves, in order to qualify for membership in a color blind society (which is no longer true color blindness at that stage, but whatever).

    But this is a big unstated presumption. Does it seem obviously true to you? I'm struggling to follow your thought process here.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Obama is as racially Caucasian as he is African. His mother was as whiteity white as white can be.

    Coming from Hawaii, where there is enormous intermarriage between races, and mixed people are generally considered mixed, Obama could have changed the narrative. He could have called himself an American of both white and black ancestry. And pointed out that most black Americans also have significant white ancestry, with the average being around 20%.

    Instead, he went with the One Drop Rule, identifying with his black ancestry.

    Curious, is it not, in a nation where being black *supposedly* is a crippling handicap in life?

  • Dadlobby||

    Mainstream right? Gee, the patriarchy, defined solely as "white males" has been under attack for 30 years now. Anyone consider it is a backlash, because when I look at it it is nothing but what has been said about white men, except reversed. Not saying it's right, in fact either direction it's wrong. BTW, "Nigger" is only an insult if used by a "white". Try this to see the comparisons, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LaEw4uGKsU.

  • Nige||

    I love that proof of institutional racism in law enforcement justifies you equating it with the people who have been pointing out that there is institutional racism in law enforcement. That's a neat little conceptual trap that works on a fractal level.

  • Radioactive||

    Know what else works on a fractal level?

  • MarioLanza||

    First off, pointing out that there is a double standard is not racism. White cop shoots a bad guy who happens to be black, the police know full well he will be branded as a racist. Black guy shoots a white cop...no cries of racism even though anti-white racism is probably far more prevalent in drug dealing gangsters.

    Finding a couple of actual racist tweets is most certainly not proof institutional racism. And arresting one minority group more is not proof of institutional racism, either.

    Correlation is not causation unless you are a leftist.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Black guy shoots a white cop...no cries of racism

    There's a power asymmetry in the cop-shoots-guy scenario, regardless of race. It's interesting to me that you didn't use the example of a black cop killing a white assailant. Why is that?

    And arresting one minority group more is not proof of institutional racism, either.

    This is true. But when you control for all relevant variables and find that there's still an imbalance, then it's strongly suggestive that institutional racism is a thing. Although, personally, I think class is more of a problem in that area than race. But I'm splitting hairs.

  • VinniUSMC||

    It's interesting to me that you didn't use the example of a black cop killing a white assailant. Why is that?

    You would posit that a black cop killing a white person would incite cries of racism from the lamestream media? Or a riot among white people?

    But when you control for all relevant variables and find that there's still an imbalance

    Citation definitely needed.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    You would posit that a black cop killing a white person would incite cries of racism from the lamestream media? Or a riot among white people?

    Not at all. In fact, I would have agreed with his point if he had presented "black cop killing white person" and the double standard that's applied. But he didn't present it that way. He presented it in a way where the white person was STILL the aggressor.

    Citation definitely needed.

    Oh there are plenty. For a review article, there's the ASA report from 2007 entitled "Race, Ethnicity, and the Criminal Justice System" (Reason.com doesn't like links)

  • vek||

    Black cops shoot white thugs all the time! According to a Harvard study, by a black guy, they're MORE likely to shoot whites than blacks! The leftists didn't like that study much, even though the guy started out trying to prove the leftist angle, he went with the real data and came to conclusions he didn't expect.

  • DarrenM||

    I've noticed this lately where people will see all blacks or all whites (or however you want to draw the lines) as belonging to some monolithic group where all individuals within that group share blame in everything anyone else in that group has ever done. So some kind of redress is seen to be needed and must be between those groups regardless of how it affects individuals. It's not just identity politics, which is bad enough. It's identify politics made very simplistic and taken to extremes.

  • vek||

    I think whites should roll with it!

    I DEMAND restitution for all the money my family has paid over the last several decades for black welfare and incarceration costs!

    I saw a study that showed that white and Asian taxpayers subsidize blacks in the US to the tune of 300 BILLION dollars a year. That's explicit racial transfer payments, mostly through various welfare programs. It's been like that for decades. I want my welfare money back damn it!

  • Brett Bellmore||

    " But when you control for all relevant variables and find that there's still an imbalance, then it's strongly suggestive that institutional racism is a thing."

    Assuming, of course, that you know what wall the relevant variables are.

  • Mark22||

    But I guess it's working so well for leftist assholes that right-wing assholes are going to get in on it too.

    Leftist asshole: "You're a white male, you are responsible for slavery and violence against minorities, you have unearned privilege. We will ostracize you, we will discriminate against you in hiring, and we demand (at gunpoint) that you give us your money."

    What response do you suggest?

  • vek||

    Some might tell them:

    "Damn right I'm a white male... You know what that means? You better not piss me off too much more, OR I'LL DO IT TO YOU FUCKERS ALL OVER AGAIN TWICE AS HARD!"

    That's about where a lot of people are at now. I hope they stop pushing, because that is one very likely conclusion if they don't. And whites will win that one. We have most of the money, power, skills, guns, etc. Nobody stands a chance against pissed off white men if they decide to unleash the beast.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Ethnic Identity Politics
    Ethnic Polylogism
    Resentment and attack of more successful ethnicity

    SJW or Nazi?
    Both

    The Left's success is premised on the Right never adopting their ideology or methods.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Seems like some indelicate complaints about double standards, something to which members of the law enforcement community might want to not call attention.

  • Eidde||

    "Double standards are bad when *they* do it! We're against double standards, but for getting recognition for our uniquely heroic qualities!"

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    [...] the now-sheriff forwarded a chain message about "white pride" containing a long list of racial slurs around the office.


    No doubt there had to be fine people among that crowd...

  • gormadoc||

    Just a few bad apples.

  • Tony||

    That is one paranoid cracker.

  • StackOfCoins||

    I wish I'd get called a cracker by more black people. That shit is hilarious.

  • DiegoF||

    Cracker is the most amusing racial slur. Also whites use it, not "reclaimed" like "yo what up my cracka" but as an insult to other whites they look socially down on. I think Chris Rock had a Weekend Update bit where he acknowledged out how inadequate a slur "cracker" is, how it just makes people laugh instead of biting like one would want a slur to do.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Cracker is fun, but Whitey tickles my retro 70s funny bone.

  • The Laissez-Ferret||

    No love for ofay or Mr Charlie?

  • buybuydandavis||

    Ofay! I didn't even know that one.

    But Mr. Charlie is definitely sweet!

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    There's a guy a block from my work with an apparent mental health issue who sits on the park bench and every time a white guy passes he calls him a "white motherfucker faggot ass bitch" under his breath. It's amazing.

  • vek||

    Well, the worst part about cracker is its origin...

    It started because we were the ones cracking the whips! I didn't know that until about 10-15 years ago. Before that I always thought it was because we were pale like a saltine cracker or something... But that's not the case. So it's basically an insult, that's not an insult, because it's actually just saying we're the ones with the power. I bet most blacks don't even know the origin, and I'm sure most whites don't.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    And here I figured they thought we were putting on the Ritz.

  • Cloudbuster||

    That origin is untrue.

    A 1783 pejorative use of "crackers" specifies men who "are descended from convicts that were transported from Great Britain to Virginia at different times, and inherit so much profligacy from their ancestors, that they are the most abandoned set of men on earth".[3] Benjamin Franklin, in his memoirs (1790), referred to "a race of runnagates and crackers, equally wild and savage as the Indians" who inhabit the "desert[ed] woods and mountains".[4]

  • Trigger Warning||

    Holy shit. What a bunch of assholes.

  • buybuydandavis||

    How dare Whitey have pride? Doesn't he know he's the Devil?

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Do you wonder why American society rejects your preferences so consistently and thoroughly?

    Keep muttering bitterly and inconsequentially. It suits you.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Trumpslide2020

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    I thought "Trumpslide" was the device used to promptly remove Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Carter Page, Rex Tillerson, Sean Spicer, that Mooch guy, Omarosa, Hope Hicks, Rob Porter, Corey Lewandowski, the Health and Services guy, Papadapolous, Gorka, Steve Bannon, Sally Yates, Jim Comey, Reince Priebus, Jason Miller, John McEntee, Gary Cohn, government officials who tell the truth, and dozens of others of the "very best" from the Trump campaign and administration.

    It appears Michael Cohen, Jeff Sessions, and Lisa Martin are next in line for the ride out of circustown, although one should never forget Melania.

  • Mark22||

    Do you wonder why American society rejects your preferences so consistently and thoroughly?

    Well, your communist asshole friends certainly reject my preferences.

    The rest of US society... not so much.

  • buybuydandavis||

    All the supposed "racist" lowlights are objections to various racist antiwhite double standards.

    Calling them racist is just another instance of a racist antiwhite double standard.

  • DiegoF||

    Nope. They are racists. So are all the blacks, Latinos, etc., who so-called liberals keep excusing for their racism.

  • buybuydandavis||

    The officers involved may very well be racists.

    But the posts provided don't establish the assertion. They were merely objections to the double standard.

    I wouldn't say that "all" of any ethnic group are racists. Plenty of each, to varying degrees.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Ah, but according to the left, just saying that identifies you as a racist. Because it's impossible for members of most ethnic groups to be "racist", as the left define racism.

    Unless they're racist against their own group, of course.

  • MarioLanza||

    Exactly. Martin Luther King Jr is now a racist because he called for a color blind society. That is how far left the left has gone.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Nah, he kind of talked out of both sides of his mouth. Said high minded things about wanting a society where people wouldn't be judged by their skin color, but also demanded racial quotas.

    The dream was supposed to be deferred until the numerical goals had been consistently met, I guess. IOW, it was supposed to just remain a dream.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    What's wrong with a double standard? That's not a rhetorical question. I'd like to hear your take.

  • buybuydandavis||

    What's wrong with a racist double standard?

    Nothing, if you're a racist.

  • buybuydandavis||

    I notice that no one argued that the posts actually *were* racist.

  • DiegoF||

    This is some racist shit right here. Not the shock trolling that everyone's talking about; that's some played out shit. What this whole thing is is an attempted demonstration of white intellectual superiority, as they illustrate how awesome whites' slurs for other races are, and how lame all the untermenschen's attempts at comebacks have been. "White boy"? "Whitey"? Come on, guys; we can do better.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Most all slurs all conceptually lame. It's the connotation that counts.

  • vek||

    Well, it's hard to insult perfection, right???

    I mean what do you say to insult Taylor Swift?

    You're so skinny ho!

    You're too pretty slut!

    Why is your ass so nice bitch!?

    It just can't be done!

  • buybuydandavis||

    "the now-sheriff forwarded a chain message about "white pride" containing a long list of racial slurs around the office."

    This is such intellectually dishonest crap.

    Salon: C.J. Ciaramella article at Reason includes a long list of racial slurs. Reason so racist!

    The post referred to was comparing antiwhite slurs to antiPOC slurs, and asking why the antiwhite slurs were ok, but the antiPOC slurs were not.

    Use-mention distinction. They did not use the slurs against anyone, they mentioned the slurs to compare the societal status of using one set rather than the other.

    The SJW rot at Reason continues it's spread.

  • StackOfCoins||

    C'mon. Who really gives a fuck about white racism? Not me, and I'm as pale as they come.

    Bring it on.

  • buybuydandavis||

    It matter too adults when the racism is institutionalized as antiwhite racial preferences and quotas.

    And it matters to kids generally. They get abused, including physically, when hatred against them is normalized.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    You keep standing up for persecuted whites, males, Christians, and bigots, buybuydandavis. Fewer and fewer people are willing to do that work.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Your hatred of Whitey is noted

  • MikeP2||

    And you are an ignorant, bigoted moron.

    Racism and discrimination is appalling in all forms. Whites are subjected to as much, if not more, racism than people of color in this country. The only difference is that it is personal, not yet institutional, although the hyper leftist media and entertainment industry is working very hard to change that.

    Equality requires equality, not pressing on the scales to make up for past wrongs.

  • MarioLanza||

    Of course it is institutional. That what quotas are - institutional racism. This is completely opposite to the left's proofs of institutional racism in the police: either correlation implies causation arguments or finding some policeman's racist tweet.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Whites are subjected to as much, if not more, racism than people of color in this country.

    Keep fighting to the last, clingers.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "When I have no argument, I'll just call you a clinger"

  • ||

    You keep standing up for persecuted whites, males, Christians, and bigots, buybuydandavis. Fewer and fewer people are willing to do that work.

    Do you realize how stupid and racist this makes you sound? Even the KKK was relatively objective in it's perceptions that white people supported slaves and preferred them to the Klan. Hitler was pretty openly aware that the world wouldn't approve of either his Imperialism *or* his ethnic cleansing.

    Rev. Kirkland on the other hand, openly thinks white people are so abhorrent and self-loathing that they won't even defend themselves (with the unstated implication being that they shouldn't).

    Keep on thinking that when the UK leaves the EU, France and Germany become even more hostile to immigrants, Italy continues to consider the notion that it's had enough. All these different races of white folk are too stupid to defend themselves.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Not all white people. Not nearly.

    Just enough of them -- concentrated in the rural and southern stretches -- to be an annoying cultural, political, economic, educational, and moral drag on our nation.

  • Flinch||

    Blame Shikha? Works for me...
    Her being in the pool at Reason is on par with Ginsburg being on the supreme court - the damage is severe and ongoing. Some of us might remember Ginsburg telegraphing to the senate committee her intent to do violence to her oath and reach into foreign law if seated on the court. She made good on it in Lawrence v Texas, going out of her way not to merely adhere to foreign law, but defunct privy law at that.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Shikha: self proclaimed "progressive libertarian"

    That's how far the cancer has spread at Reason

  • DiegoF||

    One of the cops this message was forwarded to was "Taco Johnson." Hmmm...

    You know there actually is a longstanding Mexican-American community around the Mississippi delta, a relatively small one but one of the oldest in the country? They make a variety of tamales with cornmeal instead of masa, I understand, the "hot tamales" you keep hearing about in blues music.

  • Eidde||

    TACO Johnson

    Tasers
    Assure
    Compliance with
    Officers

  • Radioactive||

    Fat ass Smith? Thunder thighs Jones?

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Not sure how it's relevant. Racism against black people in the mexican community is quite rampant. And vice versa. The idea that all non-whites gather together in anti-white solidarity is a myth. Even within the black community there is a lot of prejudice against other black groups (e.g. African blacks are the target of many American blacks).

    Taco Johnson is quite possibly the most racist asshole of the bunch. But his name is bitchin.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "The idea that all non-whites gather together in anti-white solidarity is a myth. "

    That of course was the idea.

    The whole intersectionality business seems like a huge strategic mistake. Gotta love watching SJWs eat themselves.

  • silver.||

    "They make a variety of tamales with cornmeal instead of masa"

    Do they have pellagra?

  • ||

    The idea that all non-whites gather together in anti-white solidarity is a myth.

    As is the notion that there's some all-white consensus or narrative about Jews, African Americans, Africans, Mexicans, Spaniards, The Irish, etc.

    It's almost like, despite the grandest notions of equality and post-racialism; racism, and stereotyping are ground in the the human consciousness at an exceedingly low-level. Like, for untold millions of years, if you just trusted people of a different race, tribe, family or stereotype, it would get you and even your entire tribe killed. So our brains became hardwired to look for patterns that they deem desirable and undesirable.

    I don't disagree with the notion that equality under the law is a good idea, but the idea that we should expend extra effort to make things equal is a farce. Even if we achieved absolute equality, history is rife with examples of exceedingly mono-ethnic cultures finding a cultural scapegoat, distinguishing it from a populace that was previously wholly inclusive of it, and then cleansing itself of it.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Yup I agree. And it goes beyond race. Just because we think something's a good idea, doesn't mean we should enact a law designed to imprison people who don't do that thing. Since all law is based on force, we need to be very (small-C) conservative about the application of law.

    But I think it also means we have to be realistic about the dynamics of applying that law. If things are being applied in a racially biased way, we need to rethink the law itself. It could be a great law, but if it's inherently going to be applied in a disproportionate manner, that needs to be considered. By analogy, the NFL may have a great idea about a rule to make things fairer, but if we know that the referees suck at interpreting certain things, then this needs to be taken into account when thinking about enacting the rule change.

  • DarrenM||

    We should concentrate more on applying the law equally to everyone rather than trying to apply the same law differently to different people for the sake of "fairness". We will never get to "fair" because the definition will constantly change and will be different depending on perspective. Keep it simple and apply the law equally to everyone. This is a big enough goal. We don't need to complicate it.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    "Despite making up 38 percent of the population of the county, black residents accounted for 77 percent of all arrests, 76 percent of all arrests at roadblocks, and 72 percent of all citations."

    More of that 'disparate impact' BS. Look, if black residents are committing crimes at 2-3 times the rate of the white ones, what are the police supposed to do, go out and arrest some whites minding their own business, just to make the statistics look better to the ACLU?

    Look at table 40. Blacks are offending at twice the rate whites are. (Varies according to offense, from 1.5 times worse for rape, to over four times worse for violent robbery.) So, if 38% of the population of the county is black, you'd expect black residents to account for three quarters of the arrests!

    What are the police supposed to do? Stop protecting black residents? Keep in mind, they're most of the victims of black crime.

  • fafalone||

    I asked a progressive about that, and apparently this is explained by the "fact" that police just scrutinize black people more, and arrest them more, while letting guilty white people off. Now obviously this is a valid issue with certain low level quality of life offenses, but I'm informed it also explains *all* crime differences. Police simply ignore serious violent crimes if the perpetrator is white. This is seriously what they believe.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    But the report I linked to was a victimization survey. It was literally, the people who'd been crime victims reporting who'd committed the crime against them.

    It's not seriously what they believe. Remember Jesse Jackson, that time? "There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved." He knows the truth here.

    Rather, what's going on is that they know that it would be impossibly hard for them to prove racial discrimination in a lot of cases, so they've seized upon disparate impact as a way of avoiding having to prove anything. They just assume that, absent racial discrimination, everything would be perfectly proportional, and declare any deviation from proportionality proof of discrimination.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    I don't think anyone believes that they "ignore serious violent crimes". But it's indisputable that cops scrutinize some people more than others. Most black people who are in jail are in there directly or indirectly for procedural violations -- for example, not having the correct state-approved gun license, driver's license, drug license, etc. They're also more likely to be in jail because of plea bargaining. So it shouldn't be inconceivable to understand how all of those things could be applied in a racially discriminatory way.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Most black people who are in jail are in there directly or indirectly for procedural violations -- for example, not having the correct state-approved gun license having an illegal handgun, driver's license driving without a license, drug license possession of narcotics with intent to sell, etc.

    FTFY.

    Most black people are in jail because they committed real crimes. The ones who plea down aren't held.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    It's circular logic to hang your hat on "real crimes" when the topic of the discussion is what should constitute a "real crime". I'd call those all procedural violations. The US has decided to incriminate those (for now). And with additional gun restrictions in the pipeline, the number of procedural violations will soon be expanded. And black people will undoubtedly be the main victims of many of the expansions being discussed.

  • SunkCost||

    it's so cute that you think a black person carrying a gun (with or without a license) would only get a citation.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Who me? I think I said the opposite. Were you responding to someone else?

  • bvandyke||

    I've looked at table 40 (thanks for the link will be looking at this a lot more). How are you getting the "1.5 times worse and > 4 times worse for violent robbery? Looking at the table: arrests for rape: white arrests 48.8% black arrests 18.1% just one example.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Based on the fact that blacks are only about 12% of the population, naturally.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Oh, and the chart wasn't about arrests, it's a victimization survey. It's about who people said committed the crime, not who the police arrested.

  • bvandyke||

    Ok, I get it, early and brain really doesn't want to do math.

  • DarrenM||

    I'd be interested to know the rates broken down by "rural" and "suburban" and "city".

  • gormadoc||

    That only works if you assume Madison County has similar rates as the rest of the US for correlation between race and crime. Besides, other evidence does point to the fact that Madison County LEO are targeting black people.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Ok, granted on that. My point wasn't that they weren't discriminating. It was that the disparate statistics weren't anything like proof that they were discriminating. They're exactly the sort of numbers you'd expect given nation-wide crime demographics.

    It's not that I don't think discrimination happens. I just despise the practice of treating disparate impact as proof of it. You want to claim discrimination, you have to go out and prove it, not just point to numbers that are about what you'd expect in the absence of discrimination.

  • gormadoc||

    The ACLU claims that they did some statistical analysis on the data and it still comes out disproportionate. Sadly the analysis and methodology isn't public yet, as I would have liked to see it.

    I don't agree with the generalized "American cops disproportionately arrest blacks because they're racist," but in specific cases I think it's safe to draw conclusions. The red flag to me in this one is the pre-filled narcotics case sheets.

  • Azathoth!!||

    The ACLU is lying.

    Simple math notes that if black people are 38% of the county population, and they're committing crimes at roughly twice the rate of whites then they'd account for 76% of arrests right out of the gate--any 'bias' would show as them being arrested at raters HIGHER than that.

    But they account for 72% of arrests--4 points less than their demographics would suggest.

    There ARE racist cops. But they haven't proved it with this.

  • Mike d||

    1) There's also poverty that plays a part. Both minorities and poor whites commit more crimes than middle class, but if there's racism that makes it hard for minorities to move it, they'll also commit crimes at a higher rate like any other poor person. Not than being poor and / or a victim of racism an excuse for committing a crime or anything.

    2) Blacks are more likely to choose to live in large cities because there's less racism in large cities. But people who live in large cities tend to also commit crimes (and be victims of it) than people in rural areas (I am guessing its harder to not get caught when you live in an area where everybody knows everyone else). Compare rural blacks vs rural whites or poor urban whites vs poor urban blacks and the crime rates will likely be very similar.

    Citing context statistics which may be **technically** true doesn't paint the whole picture.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    what are the police supposed to do, go out and arrest some whites minding their own business, just to make the statistics look better to the ACLU?

    Though not perfect, the ACLU tends to be a very strong advocate against making arrests of people minding their own business. So I'm pretty sure they don't want anything of the sort. Please don't confuse the ACLU with democrats, as they're very often on opposite sides of the issues. Democrats are unquestionably an authoritarian group. The ACLU is (mostly) not.

  • silver.||

    I was initially skeptical of the disparate impact implications because I don't know anything about the crime in the area, but I trust the ACLU to do this type of case correctly:

    "That data has been statistically studied and controlled for other factors, and we think it's overwhelming," Jonathan Youngwood, a lawyer at Simpson Thacher, said at the press conference.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    I trust the ACLU to do the math right, too. Doesn't mean I trust the assumptions they base the math on.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "Despite making up 38 percent of the population of the county, black residents accounted for 77 percent of all arrests, 76 percent of all arrests at roadblocks, and 72 percent of all citations."

    What percentage of the population of the county are men? What percentage of the arrests do they account for?

    End the sexist prison gap!

  • vek||

    Exactly!

    You know what's funny though? Women have actually been accounting for a bigger and bigger percentage of the prison population over the last few decades. It's probably got something to do with being liberated, strong, feminist women or something. LOL

  • buybuydandavis||

    The Patriarchy Strikes Back!

  • vek||

    Right!?

  • Radioactive||

    I'm a racist, your a racist, wouldn't you like to be a racist too? (sung to the tune of Dr. Pepper)

  • Radioactive||

    "you're"...fat fingers, HA

  • Cloudbuster||

    New data show roadblocks in the county occur twice as often in black neighborhoods as white ones.

    New data show roadblocks in the county occur twice as often in high crime neighborhoods as low crime ones.

  • ||

    black residents of Madison County, just north of the state capital of Jackson, have felt under siege from the local sheriff's department for generations, but they have been almost totally ignored by the county government.

    Why can't these black residents just move to a city like New York or L.A. where their government will listen to them?

  • SunkCost||

    They can't afford to.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Baltimore
    Chicago
    Detroit

    They've been blessed with uninterrupted rule by Democrats for a half century. They must be paradises for black residents by now.

  • ||

    This racial dissent sowing is becoming absolutely unbearably obvious by the media, academia, "activists"... Let's look at Molly's Game, the lawyer they decided to make black--despite in real life he is white, ok whatever more Hollywood race based quota filling. Then, on top of that they add this whole n**** bagel bit, that had absolutely NOTHING to do with the movie, real life Molly's story, nothing! It's just one small example, out of many. Another is District 11 in the Hunger Games, any chance they get to use their "race war narrative" as a hammer is a victory for them?

  • buybuydandavis||

    The Left sows the fear, hatred, and resentment of identity politics to divide and conquer the peasants.

  • Hank Phillips||

    It's a ruse to make Alabama look good.

  • Jayburd||

    One major black accomplishment I can think of is the transformation of a machete into a weapon of mass destruction in order to ethnic cleanse people of the same skin color. Is that racism?

  • vek||

    "Despite making up 38 percent of the population of the county, black residents accounted for 77 percent of all arrests, 76 percent of all arrests at roadblocks, and 72 percent of all citations."

    What are they complaining about... That's BELOW AVERAGE for the crime rates blacks have in most of the country for many crimes!

    They're 13% of the population, and commit 50% of the murders! So I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if those figures were just straight up prosecuting as they see 'em.

    That said, they do sound like they were doing other sketchy stuff they should get busted for. But simple finding a difference in outcomes IS NOT an automatic slam dunk for racism being the cause.

  • Carter Mitchell||

    I appreciate Reason posting the content of those "tropes" as they call them. But you fail to point out that each one is absolutely true. What's the point?

  • buybuydandavis||

    Truth is a construct of the white supremacist cisheteropatriarchy to silence marginalized peoples.

    The tropes are *obviously* problematic. Only a racist wouldn't think so.

  • Carter Mitchell||

    George Orwell would be proud of such a semantically null construct devoid of all logic and connection to reality. Let's get together sometime and have a go at solipsism. :)

  • buybuydandavis||

    My LeftySpeak has been improving

  • vek||

    As far as the broader thing goes, I'm sooooo sick of it.

    White children growing up today are a minority. Where I happened to grow up when I was younger in Cali, I grew up a minority. I had more racist anti-white shit thrown at me growing up than you can shake a stick at.

    Gen Z is said to be going hard right as far as white kids go, including having no tolerance for this anti white shit. Maybe it's because when YOU are the minority, you're sick and tired of being told you're the only one that can be racist... Especially when you've never been racist to a brown person, but they've constantly been racist to you!

    This anti white shit WILL NOT hold up for much longer, because the blow back from white people is just going to make them not put up with it anymore. And I think a lot of whites will become outwardly racist again too. I mean, why not? If you're going to get picked on for your skin color, why shouldn't you call somebody a dirty beaner or kick their ass back?

    Shit's gonna get real kids!

  • Mike d||

    I **mostly** agree with you, but:

    1) Being called racist names like "cracker" (not that thats ok either) isn't the same as getting denied a loan or a job, despite being the most qualified person. Overall, non-whites still have it worse than whites.

    2) If a backlash does happen, don't make it a mostly white gen-z kids thing. That only puts people off who would have otherwise been your / our allies. I am sure there's people of non-whites who don't approve of racism towards white kids either, but might inadvertently get put off if the rhetoric / tone is too hostile. Using phrases like "why can't we have our own white pride" probably isn't helping.

  • buybuydandavis||

    1) Getting denied a job despite being the most qualified applicant is *exactly* the result of antiwhite racial quotas and preferences do.

    2) "Whitey shouldn't get so uppity when he asserts his rights."

  • Mike d||

    Affirmative action is already starting to be on its way out. It probably won't be around in the next 20 to 30 years. In the meantime, your specific complaint was racial slurs, not job discrimination.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "What is Whitey getting so worked up about? We'll probably end his racial dhimmi status in a few decades. Whitey so uppity!"

  • vek||

    Let me say, I don't like the way it seems to be shaping up. But I don't think it is unavoidable.

    1. The truth is whites are doing better, because we do better. The fact that SOME minority groups fail at life is NOT our fault. It's their fault, or genes, depending on what you believe. Either way whites should not get fucked, so that lesser people (through cultural failure or genes, whichever one believes) can be propped up. Everybody is sick of it.

    So the fact that they have it worse isn't our fault, and we shoudn't be punished. So #1 is irrelevant.

    2. It's happening on its own. Most older whites who grew up in the great majority don't "get it," because they were actually the dominant group. So they're idiots and don't see it all for what it is. I agree that the optimum tact should be different... But you're overestimating the number of non whites who will give a shit. I have NEVER in my life seen a significant portion of any ethnic group give 2 fucks about white people. Why? Because their people are even worse off, in group bias is real and in every group, and so they just don't care. Why should they? It is beneficial for them to screw whites, like tax transfers do now, so why wouldn't they want to keep doing it?

  • buybuydandavis||

    2. Multiculturalism is a unicultural phenomena

  • Mike d||

    *sigh*

    I'll bite, hope its not too late to post and you lost interest.

    1) I seriously doubt there's anything genetic that makes minorities less likely to accomplish things than whites (and I guess Asians). I'll grant you culture factors.

    a) Ok, so then why can't it be both. Why can't there both be culture factors that minorities are doing dumb things from getting ahead AND be victims of racism at the same time. Or, if you are an individual black person who doesn't fall into the negative black person stereotypes, still get punished for it by potential employers or lenders due to collective punishment.

    b) So how much of the culture failures on the part of minorities are the **result** of some of them giving up, due to the racism. Not that its an excuse.

    2) Ok, you probably have some good points on that one.

  • vek||

    1. You may or may not want to look into all the evidence that the IQ gaps are in fact 50-80% genetic in origin... The data has been around for a long time, and been suppressed by PC politics because it is an unthinkable proposition. But it may yet be true. I've researched, and have my conclusions, but you may care to look yourself.

    A. I agree that that is possible. I'm sure plenty of blacks that have their shit together get lumped in because of the ghetto ones. However I don't think it is a major factor. When you look at statistics and judge by comparable educations, SAT scores, IQ etc you find blacks have almost EXACTLY the same outcome as whites who match up with other important stats. Problem is blacks just don't do as well on all the things that make one succeed in the modern west. So it's a small effect according to known stats.

  • vek||

    B. Probably a few, but again not much. If we're so evil and racist, why is it that Asians succeed more than whites in OUR racist country?

    Why do African immigrants (which are somewhat self selected to being a touch higher educated if being honest here) do better in America than native blacks? Why do uneducated African immigrants even do a smidge better? If they're giving up, it's not my fault. There is less racism now than anytime in human history probably. Also, they were doing better on many stats in the past when we were even more racist... Plus stats show those that do the right things do fine nowadays. So if this is a major problem, they need to get over it. The truth is a lot of them are just fuck ups, and fuck ups fuck up!

  • vek||

    Ahhh what the hell. Here's an interview with an above average intelligence black guy who came to the conclusion IQ differences are genetic after researching the subject. If a fair number of blacks can accept the data for where it seems to point...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= V3ikp08fMls&bpctr=1521562538

    Whether you agree or not on the subject, it is interesting to look into. There is a wealth of data that AT LEAST explains their current plight, because they DO have vastly lower IQs now. Whether it is genetic is not relevant, it explains why they fail so hard in the here and now. If you research the topic thoroughly at least you can make proper arguments on the subject in the future.

  • vek||

    So even if you keep it as neutral as possible, any ideas about non whites being a major part of the "movement" to make changes is basically delusional. It's not gonna happen. MAYBE Asians because they're getting the same treatment all of a sudden because they're successful and have their shit together like white people. But nobody else seems plausible.

  • Mike d||

    You **DO** realize that there are a ton of black and Hispanic people out there that are in romantic relationships with white people, right. I mean they probably won't date you for numerous reasons (I am assuming you're a white guy like me).

    They're probably not going to support their white partner taking racist crap, but there's also a line between "fighting back" versus just whining and being the victim. I mean no offense, but you seem more on the "being a victim" side of the line than just "fighting back".

  • vek||

    Of course I know there are people who date people from other ethnic groups. I even had sexy time with a half Chinese girl! :)

    I am mostly white, and was raised totally white, but I'm a touch native American and Mexican. I tan a bit.

    I don't really think of myself as a victim per se. But it is clear there's been a major and intentional attack on whites in the USA and Europe for some decades now by progressive elites. I think it's bullshit.

    Maybe if I sound whiny it's just the specifics of this debate?

    Frankly, I think whites are going to do pretty okay no matter what gets thrown at us. As screwed up as western culture has become, we're still doing basically totally fine. Even when we are minorities in our own countries we're still going to dominate economic life, and probably political life. We'll survive and thrive.

    But I still don't like how we're being told we're not allowed to have countries of our own, AKA we have to become minorities in our own lands. It's a BS double standard. Same with all the other anti white stuff.

    Most people tend to date/marry people of their own ethnicity, by wide margins. Some groups intermix more often, like whites and Hispanics. That said, a lot of minorities are not likely to come over any which way. They simply don't care that much. They care about THEIR group interests. Maybe some people dating white people will or whatever, but they're never going to be a big portion of the Hispanic/black population.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "Where I happened to grow up when I was younger in Cali, I grew up a minority."

    Same for me in Hawaii, where whites were the hated minority. "Haoles". There was a quaint custom called "Kill Haole Day" to beat up white kids on the last day of school. Mostly observed in the breach, but it did happen, and it was characteristic of the general level of hostility toward white children and the violence and threats of violence they faced.

    There was that story maybe in the fall about a white kid in a majority Hispanic school who was shot at school by a cop when he brandished knives shouting for people to get away from him. He had been attacked by groups of kids the previous day, and they were going to do it again that day. Killed by cop for trying to protect himself from beatings.

    They'd still be talking about it on national news if the races in the story were reversed.

  • vek||

    Yup. As I said above, older whites just don't get it. When you were 95% of the population growing up, it's hard to relate. Now nationally whites are under 50%. In many specific areas they are faaaaaar less than that. But in theory now, even in most of the midwest, etc you're either a minority, or barely over 50%. And of course non whites have ZERO problem being aggressively racist and anti white, because they've been taught it's totally okay!

    I'm part Mexican on my moms side, and I can't tell you how many times that basically saved my ass from being fucked with by Mexicans. I'm juuust tan enough when I get some sun to where it's believable, since it is true, but not tan enough for people to automatically assume. So I'd basically have to bust out "My moms Mexican bro, it's coo'" with gang banger types. If I was paler, like my dad, I would have probably got in a lot more fights just trying to mind my own business growing up.

    This shit cannot stand. I don't think it's ever going to change. In group bias is biological. I have come to the conclusion multi-ethnic states are inherently a bad idea. No country needs to be 100% pure, but when you have enough minorities that they become voting blocks, and take over whole cities, I think the problems we are having are inevitable. And they're NOT worth it just so you can say "See, look how diverse we are!" The downsides outweigh whatever negligible upsides there may be... Not that any have ever been shown besides ethnic food anyway.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "I think the problems we are having are inevitable. And they're NOT worth it just so you can say "See, look how diverse we are!" The downsides outweigh whatever negligible upsides there may be... "

    But somebody might call me a racist! Waaaaaaah!

    I think you're overplaying the biological racial of problems, but this point is good. We've got a society that works, and works better than most. Importing people from less libertarian, less free countries is something we should weigh the costs and benefits of, where the costs and benefits are relative to the Americans already here.

  • vek||

    I dunno man. I used to be more optimistic about different groups getting along. But it's a scientific fact that people have a preference for those that look like them. Tribalism is in our genes. I think we're going to end up with the same ethnic infighting that every other multi-ethnic society in history had.

    Maybe I'm too pessimistic now, but I don't think so.

    Whatever the case we surely don't need to be letting in unskilled labor from countries that clash strongly with our culture. I just don't see an upside. High skill labor, sure, in reasonable numbers.

  • Mike d||

    Interesting dilemma for libertarians:

    1) Most of us support the officer's legal right to his dumb opinions, no matter how racist they are, so long as he's doing it as a private citizen.

    2) Most of us are not ok with a racist police officer using the power of the state to enforce his/her opinions, and that includes using government issued email servers to spread his nonsense.

    3) Ok, so what if he said those things OUTSIDE the office. How far removed would he need to be for it to count as doing it on his own time. a) Does hanging out with work buddies after work making his statements count, specially if being friendly can lead to a promotion? b) What if he's being accused of racism for on-the-job actions, should we be allowed to enter his off-the-clock remarks as part of evidence.

    Man, thats a tough one.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "Whites who object to antiwhite racism are obviously racists. It's quite a conundrum to decide when exactly we'll take their rights away for failing to internalize antiwhite hatred. "

    Another Libertarian Moment at Reason.com

  • vek||

    This guy probably is "racist," but simply calling out anti white racism doesn't prove that.

    Any cop should be held accountable for bad actions, no matter what race they're against. If a cop busts somebody for something that's against the law... What's the problem? If he lets white people slide for going 10 over more often than he lets blacks do it, I guess that's kinda messed up... But he's still busting somebody for breaking the law. So should that be anything punishable at all???

    Planting evidence, or making stuff up he should get rail roaded for either way. It is kinda tough I guess, but stronger enforcement in communities with known issues is perhaps not the worst idea in the world anyway. It's kinda inevitable, and nationally blacks are far and away the most dysfunctional community. This will never go away until blacks get their shit together.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    If he lets white people slide for going 10 over more often than he lets blacks do it, I guess that's kinda messed up... But he's still busting somebody for breaking the law. So should that be anything punishable at all???

    nationally blacks are far and away the most dysfunctional community.

    That is the thinking of a bigot, whether that bigot knows it or not.

    Develop some self-awareness, vek. Maybe some character, too. Or, let's just wait until you finally perform a useful service to our society by taking your stale, right-wing thinking to the grave and enabling a better, younger, more modern person to improve the American electorate by taking your position in it.

    I hope you choose to improve, vek.

  • vek||

    Hey man, I said it was messed up! And it is. But arresting somebody for breaking a law is still what the cop is supposed to do... I think cops should be color blind, but there's really no way to enforce it, other than when they blatantly do something wrong in a single situation. If a cop arrests twice as many blacks as whites, often times that's just how many more crimes blacks seem to commit, so it's not racism.

    As for blacks being the most dysfunctional community... It's true? Am I supposed to apologize for being able to read statistics?

    On your final point, I don't have any adjustments to make. I see the world more accurately than 99% of people out there. Not all the facts are nice, but I accept them.

    Unfortunately I AM one of those younger Americans you speak of. And views like mine are becoming more common as people get red pilled about facts that the leftists lied about and covered up our whole lives. I will be alive for MANY decades to come. I will not be changing appreciably on most of my major positions, as I'm quite sure the broad strokes are correct already.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    "Am I supposed to apologize for being able to read statistics?"

    Yes! When O'Brien wants you to see five fingers, you're obligated to see five fingers. How many fingers there really are doesn't enter into it.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "Any cop should be held accountable for bad actions, no matter what race they're against. "

    We could have had a nice "Police Brutality Matters" movement that everyone could get behind and address the problem of police brutality.

    Instead, it was derailed by the Left turning it into an identity politics movement to sow the fear, hatred, and resentment of racial identity politics, dividing America based on race.

    Gotta say, though, it was impressive of Kapernick to turn it into a openly Hate America First movement by choosing the playing of and standing for the national anthem as the symbol to urinate over. Stroke of evil genius there.

  • Flinch||

    Well, considering there are about twice as many murders in black neighborhoods, having twice as many roadblocks looks like police are actually trying to do something about it. Sadly, throwing skinhead mantras into the mix is utterly toxic, and invites us to shut off our common sense. The whole situation is sad from every angle.

  • Jakester||

    Blacks get disproportionately arrested and their part of town gets more police presence. It can't have anything to do with the fact that blacks are the main sources of crime in most places.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Despite making up 38 percent of the population of the county, black residents accounted for 77 percent of all arrests, 76 percent of all arrests at roadblocks, and 72 percent of all citations.

    That sounds about right, based on national crime statistics.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online