I get what you are saying, and to an extent i agree that what you are saying could be an outcome. Where i disagree is how drastically things will change. Where i live, and where i have lived is on the forefront of that change. Years if not decades ahead of most of the country. I am still shocked at what walking HR disasters some of my colleagues and family in other states would be if they moved to my area. When my aunt’s speech is stilted because she is used to saying “chinky food” but stutters embarrassed and corrects to “chineese food”, is that an infringement on her rights? I dont think so. So i am the metaphorical canary in the coalmine, for folks who dont live in an already progressive society, and i am saying that everything is still pretty darn copacetic. My rights arent being trampled and the general rule of “don’t be an asshole” still wins the day 99% of the time with 99% of the population. When that starts changing, and it could, i will change my tune along with many others. Even a DARK blue state like WA has 40% republicans in it.
Yet, it is accepted scholarship in academia.
You assume the parents don’t agree. Tyranny does not need the majority in order to rule. BLM is a proponent of these beliefs. It raises a lot of money and donates it to political campaigns.
They would have to strip a few million other people if that were the case.
Eh. I think all people are racist, including all white folks. It’s not a choice IMO, but instead part of our lizard brain survival instinct kicking in based on past experiences real, told to us, or imagined. The choice is whether to act or not on those instincts.
Also, that piece reads like a drunken late night Facebook rant with remarkabley good editing. More rant than persuasive writing… But I’m not the target audience for Medium I don’t think.
Actions and words are what should be judged. If someone doesn’t do or say racist things, they should be judged to not be racist. Saying someone is racist based only on the color of their skin is however racist. Agree on your point, just that we should judge based on what the person does or says.
Agree on the writing as well. It was very poor.
Are you some kind of Sicilian separatist?
Agreed - we’ll just have to wait and see. But please do note that societal change doesn’t happen gradually but in short, jerky bursts, either violently or not.
Or at least the kind of change we are talking about. It makes sense that kind of shift would be more abrupt and sudden.
Defund the police, now the criminals have free reign
Are the Minneapolis police understaffed right now? I know the defund proposal still needs to be voted on in November, and couldn’t begin to be enacted til Q2 21.
Also, what’s wrong with that advice? If you have any doubts, just give the robber your phone or wallet. Those things are cheap and trivial compared to a busted nose, stitches, ER visit or worse.
Racism cannot be biological because there is only one race.
… The Human Race. Duh duh DUHHHH!!!
I know. What’s next? The people will want the government to form an agency that will protect them from crime?
All Italians are separatists. It took fascism to change that and it only managed to get the trains to run on time. Which, if you think about it, was quite an achievement.
And they don’t need to change everyone. It’s the Pareto principle.
That’s your problem–you’re still using logic. This isn’t a logic battle; if it were you would be right. This is Marc Antony v Brutus eulogy speech. Brutus lays out the logic, and Antony clobbers him by playing the crowd with a logically weak but emotionally strong speech.
Logic has rarely been the guiding light for all of humanity, and certainly not in politics. Instead, just like Shakespeare, it’s power.
This is exactly how those crazy movements in other countries started. I share your skepticism, and I don’t buy into panic in any case, but these need to be met strongly and stubbornly and with zero remorse. Otherwise the cancer will eventually metastasize.
Nothing is more influential or immortal than an idea once taken hold. Bad ideas must be strangled in the crib.
Yes, her reasoning is shite. But, and this is the important thing, she is a best selling author whose shitty logic and terrible views are being praised nationwide.
Marc Antony v Brutus.
I wanted to come back to this. We’re probably on opposite sides on this one, and I respect that you don’t feel alarm bells ringing yet. That’s fine and we can disagree.
Here’s the thing I’d like to point out: the slippery slope argument is not always fallacious. It’s really only fallacious when it is used such that one accepts the end result without question. I.e. “If a then z”. It is not deductively valid or sound.
The problem is twofold: first, most people do not behave deductively. In other words, people do not behave logically. Second, the “slippery slope” argument is really a practical argument, not a deductive one. It centers on relative risk and consequences. If a happening raises the risk of z considerably, and can be supported by evidence or argument (at least in case law) one can very much accept this argument. This obviously leaves wide open the question of exactly how much elevated risk is acceptable and how much evidence is acceptable, but it is supported in a practical sense.
In general although I like logic we have to accept that people are not logical en masse. The quote in the movie Men in Black rings true: " No, a PERSON is smart. People are dumb panicky animals and you know it."
People operate on emotion and ego, and a desire for power, retribution, and selfishness. This means a lot of perfectly logical arguments are not applicable. This conundrum is well known in economic modelling, and it’s been a largely intractable problem for them.
I’m not really sure, but it seems they are taking a hands-off approach to crime prevention.
It implies that the police are not doing their job. Crime is up, and instead of doing something about it they tell people to simply cooperate with the criminals. Why not encourage people to visit the gun range more often and wear body armor? Might help deter crime too.
I’m somewhat skeptical of the news site that story was posted from, but the story doesn’t seem far fetched.
To be fair though, the advice to cooperate is very old and usually good. That’s nothing new.
It wouldn’t surprise me if there was a slowdown in policing though.