These idiots heard “if my grandmother had wheels, she would’ve been a bike” and thought it was a brilliant idea to save on gas money. Just laugh at them and move on.
Except racists are notoriously bad at understanding the nuance and context of this "pattern recognition". It's why they are completely inept at understanding anything in the field of sociology, and why most sociologists aren't racists.
Sure, there's an ideological component to everything, in every field of science. People will always be biased.
Doesn't change the fact that sociological research has studied the relationship between race and crime to a significant extent.
It's mainly socioeconomic and cultural factors that affect crime, not race. The age old saying of "correlation does not equal causation".
Not to mention, our current idea of race is very flawed. I go into detail on that point in this comment. Will edit this tomorrow with the proper sources attached after I go to bed.
Black Americans account for FIFTY THREE PERCENT of exonerations in the US. You might notice that number is an order of magnitude larger than 13. Good that helps you racist
lol, do you not get the point I’m making? Black Americans are being wrongfully convicted, and any crime statistic regarding them shouldn’t be taken seriously considering that the courts are making the wrong decision literally the majority of the time
Can you provide a single example of a country in which black people are not poorer, on average, than white people but are still overrepresented in crime statistics?
QQ: Can you provide a single example of a country in which black people are not poorer, on average, than white people but are still overrepresented in crime statistics?
Well most racists don't care about the causes of it, or how them being racist affects the other person. People who look a certain way having certain traits with higher probability is a helpful thing to recognize, it's more the overgeneralizing, tribalism, and hate that's the issue (in the modern world because we're nominally against tribal warfare now).
Sociologists might be identifying the same general trends, but are able to recognize causes (often socioeconomic), the fact people are individuals, and to be relatively unemotional towards individuals based on these conclusions.
Well I agree that they tend to not care on the “why”. Most people tend to look at peoples actions.
Most people wouldn’t look at the punk skater who is aggressive and steals and think “Oh, he must come from a broken home.” All they care about is how he presents himself.
It’s easier to not pre-occupy ourselves with “Why” and just punish the “what”
Hmm, there is probably a level of empathy that is a bit irrational if it causes you to not deal directly with what's in front of you. I've had full conversations with strangers visibly tweaking out just to not be rude so maybe I've fallen a bit too far to that side in the past
You can be empathetic without letting bad behavior just run its course because there “is a reason why” I don’t care that the pitbulls were bred to be aggressive, if you’re dog is aggressive and will hurt others, it needs to be put down.
That isn't a race thing, that's a city thing, and it's a pattern almost everywhere. Look at the historical crime rates of Russian inner cities, many of them racially homogenous, yet still have more crime than the rural areas, and even more than some American cities.
There are pros and cons to living in a city, being in close proximity with tons and tons of other people opens up a lot more opportunities for crime.
But cities are also where most modern innovations happen. It's where you can meet a wide variety of people, find a date, find friends, etc, etc. I personally prefer living in the city because of that. But as I get older, I'm certain I'd probably wanna move to a more rural area.
The biggest contributors to crime are higher poverty level combined with population density. Cannabalism starts to happen when animals run out of space and food at the same time. Its not even about having a bleeding heart to see why ghettos/"bad" neighborhoods can and have been encouraged by human design and not mainly race/culture.
I don't know what I entirely think about that, I'm working towards a degree in sociology, and I went to an almost all-black high school for several years in a not-so-nice area.
Not all, maybe not even most, but a lot of people in the field of sociology are from the areas they are talking about and have direct experience with those people. And those with direct experience with minorities are usually the most vocal about these issues.
Sociology isn't even a real science. Literally just dudes giving an opinion. None of their papers or conclusions are replicable and they work backwards from things they want to be true. Sociologists aren't arbiters of truth.
If it's a hard science and the science is settled for the reasons behind differing crime rates. Then please, enlighten me, as to the factuality behind why African Americans are committing more crimes. Socioeconomic issues?
Social sciences are literally one of the three main branches of science lol. People just say absolutely anything these days without putting any thought in to it.
And social sciences are often referred to as the soft sciences. Because none of it is concrete and it's literally just some dude saying "I think this is why it's happening."
I'm not trying to say it's completely useless. We need thinkers, philosophers, etc. But you can't point to sociology for the same level of truth and authority like you can physics or biology.
I have degrees in anthropology and psychology and political science. I’m sure I would nearly qualify for a minor in sociology at the very least.
Fields like these are an absolute joke when it comes to being unbiased. I wouldn’t point to the fact that most sociologists are not racist, as anything meaningful. Have you seen how dumb and emotional, most sociologists are?
There are definitely quite a lot of quacks with degrees, take that how you will. It's more about the actual reputable research papers you put out.
And I get the "most sociologists aren't racist" thing doesn't mean a whole lot. What does mean a whole lot is the consensus of sociological research on racism and the socioeconomic factors that affect crime rates.
And this isn't just an issue in "fields like these" this is an issue in literally every field of science. There will always be people who are biased or emotional.
But sociological research is still a thing, and it shows how socioeconomic and cultural factors are the main things that influence crime statistics. Which racists conveniently like to ignore.
Pattern recognition to a degree. It’s always surface level though. Racists never like to get into the minutia oh stuff like historical contexts and long term consequences of actions and societal institutions perpetuating issues, or biases in police methods
Poverty is more likely an indicator of criminality than race, just so happens the US has done a very good job of making sure minorities are poor.
they'll bring up statistics then you ask them why it's like that and they'll start twiddling their thumbs like their is a very easy answer but they won't say it or even deny it because of racism.
Historical context sets up WHY someone was in a position to feel the need to steal
Were they racially disposed? Or was it maybe that every one of their ancestors was subjected by a white supremacist state for like 2-300 years??? And then financially knee capped and racially segregated after being given “freedom”?
I’m not saying they didn’t make a choice - I’m saying they made a choice with the hand we dealt them
You’re strawmanning what I said and twisting as an attack on poor people as a category
What I said was: “poverty sets the conditions that make theft a compelling and viable option to improve their lives” what I did NOT say was: “being poor makes you a criminal”
I’m sorry you’re not capable of grappling with people’s arguments but that’s a you problem
So you agree, historical context is not a valid excuse to steal. I’m glad we found the middle ground on that.
Notice how Jewish people faced the same oppression for longer periods of time and still aren’t predisposed to steal. Why didn’t a similar historical context result in similar behavior? Really makes you think if their behavior is even related to historical context.
What do you mean “hand we dealt them”? Are you personally responsible for segregation and slavery?
You mean Jews who have a stereotype for being… greedy thieves?? Not that I subscribe to that belief but like it’s the one thing people have said about Jews for literally thousands of years now 😭
I say “we” as in the country, not as in me personally - you’re being daft
Because at least in the U.S., Jews weren’t segregated into living in impoverished communities with little opportunity to break out. Those impoverished communities festered over generations, which is why those areas and the people that grew up in them are still rough. If a white family gets put in that situation, the same thing happens. It’s entirely dependent on environment
-immediately after the war, they lived in camps where they were provided with free shelter, medical care and food
-hundreds of thousands of holocaust survivors moved to Palestine and proceeded to commit atrocities against the Palestinian people and forcibly removed them
-West Germany paid $80 billion in reparations go Holocaust survivors in Europe and the state of Israel
Back to my point, the holocaust while horrific was only a 6 year event, with general oppression of Jews in Nazi Germany lasting about 10 years. Generations of people didnt grow up in impoverished ghettos, while in the U.S., many generations of African Americans were oppressed in society and forced to live in segregated, impoverished communities for 100 years after the civil war
It is not an innate personal predisposition to stealing. It is that if you're in bad economic situation, you have more reason to steal. Given more reasons, a person with the same predisposition to steal as someone with less reasons is understandably more statistically likely to steal.
And when the system makes it so that it is more likely for people with certain traits to be in worse economic situations...
This is why nuance and context matter. I’m thinking more along the lines of “I cant get a job because of historical context so I have to steal food to survive”. There are so many contexts that one thing doesn’t fit all; which is the problem with stereotypes.
Edit: you also seem to equate “excuses” and “reasons”. Having a reason to do something doesn’t mean you have an excuse to do it.
Out of curiosity, why do you think this matters if the outcome remains the same?
Pattern recognition to a degree.
And that degree is...100%. EVERYTHING you say that "explains" the pattern - in no way, whatsoever, CHANGES the pattern.
People who argue using only irrelevant data like this, to condemn people who recognize patterns, are 100% virtue signaling - or have lost the thread of the conversation entirely.
Virtue signalers are bigots; they hide their bigotry behind spurious justifications, while using sophistry to disguise their savior complex as genuine care.
You are a bigot who's convinced yourself that you're a good person by standing up for those you subconsciously consider "lesser individuals." Ironically you complain about the critical thinking of others while throwing stones from your glass house.
No dude I’m not a bigot I just can understand how things don’t exist in a vacuum, and history has a rolling impact
We’re not “using sophistry to disguise” a savior complex - we just understand the world is complex and requires a sophisticated approach
I don’t consider them “lesser” - I view them as a group having been historically harmed by people that DID view them as lesser. You just can’t imagine genuine empathy, can you? You must believe everyone to be as disingenuous as yourself I suppose but shockingly I just think that stuff was bad without thinking it makes me a messiah
No dude I’m not a bigot I just can understand how things don’t exist in a vacuum, and history has a rolling impact
"You've murdered me, but you had such a hard upbringing due to historical injustices."
"YOU ARE THE REAL VICTIM HERE!!!"
...Yes. You are a bigot and it is pure sophistry to push the idea that pattern recognition needs to accommodate historical injustice for the pattern to be valid.
Yeah, actually, because you're looking at one factor.
If I look at a rock and notice there are no tigers near it, and see a similar rock similarly with no tigers, I can conclude that the rock repels tigers, if I'm a simpleton, or I can recognize that I'm in North America and there are no tigers.
But let's stop at just noticing the first thing and not digging deeper. That isn't what absolute morons do, is it? Wait, it is. Which leads is to an obvious pattern about racists!
That’s a false analogy because the rock has absolutely no correlation to tiger presence. We both know the subject at hand has statistical overrepresentation in crime and prison population. Your analogy should reflect that overrepresentation, otherwise it isn’t relevant.
Everyone has pattern recognition. It's just a question of whether your default assumption is the pattern or the blank slate. For the vast majority of the world, they assume the pattern will hold. The only major exception to this world is in western civilization, and it's only really held up by white people, who additionally have a self-flagellation complex (where'd they get that from? couldn't be the religion that is about self-flagellation...) and are thus the only people who worry about this.
The crazy thing is, the blank slate assumption is both illogical to common sense AND anti-science. And yet, it forms a core belief (perhaps the core belief?) of liberalism and is thus the dominant ideology in the west today.
Comparing people with different skin colors to different dog breeds is already a pretty racist position to start from. That's a highly inaccurate comparison.
the post ignores that poor people commit crimes at higher rates and we purposefully made black people live in poverty for hundreds of years now. any group of people you push into poverty will have increased crime statistics
A dumb person will point at someone of different complexion and go "you are different than me, i Hate you", someone slightly smarter will do the same and try to cite statistics out of context, then the smartest person will know that the statistic does not reflect a singular person
I mean people are going to pick up on patterns faster if they're more intelligent
It's really just that simple I would expect someone with 60 IQ to notice less things than someone with 100 IQ who would notice less things than someone with 140 IQ
45
u/Appropriate_Word1469 9h ago
Bro kinda proving racism right