[martyup]

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/11/13/...ail+digest

From the article:

Walker-Hartshorn asked that anyone who identified as black move to the front of the photograph.

So, I guess any non-black students (e.g., white, asian, hispanic, etc.) had to move to the back or just get the hell out of the picture.  THEY ASKED THE CROWD TO DIVIDE UP BY RACE FOR THE PHOTO!!  AT STANFORD!! Boy, I bet MLK would be so proud.  ::)

P.S., Wasn't there a swastika involved?  Why weren't the Jewish students called to the front too?

[martyup]

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/11/13/...ail+digest

From the article:

Walker-Hartshorn asked that anyone who identified as black move to the front of the photograph.

So, I guess any non-black students (e.g., white, asian, hispanic, etc.) had to move to the back or just get the hell out of the picture.  THEY ASKED THE CROWD TO DIVIDE UP BY RACE FOR THE PHOTO!!  AT STANFORD!! Boy, I bet MLK would be so proud.  ::)

P.S., Wasn't there a swastika involved?  Why weren't the Jewish students called to the front too?

[cardcrimson]

I'm guessing this will come off the wrong way, but a simple question: If the system were truly built to bury them [I really dislike the us vs. them], how could they be students at the greatest university in the world and even allowed the opportunity to protest?

From the article:
“Now we are here,” said organizer Ryan Walker-Hartshorn ’17. “This is our time, this is our moment, and this is our movement. Today symbolizes a small contribution to the fight for all black lives and for all marginalized people. We all know that the system was built to bury us, but they didn’t know that we were the seeds.”

[cardcrimson]

I'm guessing this will come off the wrong way, but a simple question: If the system were truly built to bury them [I really dislike the us vs. them], how could they be students at the greatest university in the world and even allowed the opportunity to protest?

From the article:
“Now we are here,” said organizer Ryan Walker-Hartshorn ’17. “This is our time, this is our moment, and this is our movement. Today symbolizes a small contribution to the fight for all black lives and for all marginalized people. We all know that the system was built to bury us, but they didn’t know that we were the seeds.”

[BigEasyCard]

I'm guess this will come off the wrong way, but a simple question: If the system was truly built to bury them [I really dislike the us vs. them], how could they be students at the greatest university in the world and even allowed the chance to protest?

From the article:
“Now we are here,” said organizer Ryan Walker-Hartshorn ’17. “This is our time, this is our moment, and this is our movement. Today symbolizes a small contribution to the fight for all black lives and for all marginalized people. We all know that the system was built to bury us, but they didn’t know that we were the seeds.”

That was my first thought as well.

[BigEasyCard]

I'm guess this will come off the wrong way, but a simple question: If the system was truly built to bury them [I really dislike the us vs. them], how could they be students at the greatest university in the world and even allowed the chance to protest?

From the article:
“Now we are here,” said organizer Ryan Walker-Hartshorn ’17. “This is our time, this is our moment, and this is our movement. Today symbolizes a small contribution to the fight for all black lives and for all marginalized people. We all know that the system was built to bury us, but they didn’t know that we were the seeds.”

That was my first thought as well.

[Rally]

So much hypocracy overlays these sort of things.  The students in the 60s who loudly protested "free speech!" When far leftist were threatened with being banned on campus are now teachers, telling their students to protest the appearance of people they don't like.  Rice and Carson come to mind, and to these protesters the color of their skin doesn't matter, yet they insist only black people be in front of the picture.  Would they allow Condi or Carsen in the front row?  I doubt it.  And just as an aside, what does "identify as black" mean?  Ms. Dolozal?

[Rally]

So much hypocracy overlays these sort of things.  The students in the 60s who loudly protested "free speech!" When far leftist were threatened with being banned on campus are now teachers, telling their students to protest the appearance of people they don't like.  Rice and Carson come to mind, and to these protesters the color of their skin doesn't matter, yet they insist only black people be in front of the picture.  Would they allow Condi or Carsen in the front row?  I doubt it.  And just as an aside, what does "identify as black" mean?  Ms. Dolozal?

[cardcoug]

I'm guess this will come off the wrong way, but a simple question: If the system was truly built to bury them [I really dislike the us vs. them], how could they be students at the greatest university in the world and even allowed the chance to protest?

I don't think I'm fully on board with the protests, but I think this is just an utterly terrible argument. (Or more specifically, the implication behind your question is fallacious.) First, why does the system have to be "built to bury them", so radically so that they are unable to attend the college of their choice or even protest, in order to be objectionable? If you consider only the protest part of your questions it basically implies that no protest is ever warrented unless it is the type that will be put down. Thats a pretty extreme viewpoint, to say the least. The other part of the question then implies that as long as some minorities are allowed to attend Stanford, there isn't really any racism worth complaining about. I really doubt that you think either of those two points are true, so then isn't the answer to your question extremely simple, and have basically no implications one way or the other about the protesters?

[cardcoug]

I'm guess this will come off the wrong way, but a simple question: If the system was truly built to bury them [I really dislike the us vs. them], how could they be students at the greatest university in the world and even allowed the chance to protest?

I don't think I'm fully on board with the protests, but I think this is just an utterly terrible argument. (Or more specifically, the implication behind your question is fallacious.) First, why does the system have to be "built to bury them", so radically so that they are unable to attend the college of their choice or even protest, in order to be objectionable? If you consider only the protest part of your questions it basically implies that no protest is ever warrented unless it is the type that will be put down. Thats a pretty extreme viewpoint, to say the least. The other part of the question then implies that as long as some minorities are allowed to attend Stanford, there isn't really any racism worth complaining about. I really doubt that you think either of those two points are true, so then isn't the answer to your question extremely simple, and have basically no implications one way or the other about the protesters?

[OutsiderFan]

I'm not going to pretend racism doesn't exist, but consider this...

My mother was a first generation Italian.  Her people endured all kinds of ridicule and marginalization.  They spoke Italian in the home, but never had the audacity to do anything other than learn how to speak English outside of it.  There wasn't any ESL class in school, there weren't Italian instructions at banks.  They didn't ask for, get, or expect any special treatment.  They learned how to assimilate into the predominant American culture, worked their asses off, and earned respect by doing so.

[OutsiderFan]

I'm not going to pretend racism doesn't exist, but consider this...

My mother was a first generation Italian.  Her people endured all kinds of ridicule and marginalization.  They spoke Italian in the home, but never had the audacity to do anything other than learn how to speak English outside of it.  There wasn't any ESL class in school, there weren't Italian instructions at banks.  They didn't ask for, get, or expect any special treatment.  They learned how to assimilate into the predominant American culture, worked their asses off, and earned respect by doing so.

[stupac2]

I'm not going to pretend racism doesn't exist, but consider this...

My mother was a first generation Italian.  Her people endured all kinds of ridicule and marginalization.  They spoke Italian in the home, but never had the audacity to do anything other than learn how to speak English outside of it.  There wasn't any ESL class in school, there weren't Italian instructions at banks.  They didn't ask for, get, or expect any special treatment.  They learned how to assimilate into the predominant American culture, worked their asses off, and earned respect by doing so.

That prejudice against Italians was less virulent than that against blacks proves... what, exactly?

[stupac2]

I'm not going to pretend racism doesn't exist, but consider this...

My mother was a first generation Italian.  Her people endured all kinds of ridicule and marginalization.  They spoke Italian in the home, but never had the audacity to do anything other than learn how to speak English outside of it.  There wasn't any ESL class in school, there weren't Italian instructions at banks.  They didn't ask for, get, or expect any special treatment.  They learned how to assimilate into the predominant American culture, worked their asses off, and earned respect by doing so.

That prejudice against Italians was less virulent than that against blacks proves... what, exactly?

[cardcrimson]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Now, is that same system built to bury Asians and Asian Indians as well? Just another question. . . .

[cardcrimson]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Now, is that same system built to bury Asians and Asian Indians as well? Just another question. . . .

[stupac2]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Now, is that same system built to bury Asians and Asian Indians as well? Just another question. . . .

It's a little hyperbolic, but it's closer to true than saying that there's no systemic racism in this country.

[stupac2]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Now, is that same system built to bury Asians and Asian Indians as well? Just another question. . . .

It's a little hyperbolic, but it's closer to true than saying that there's no systemic racism in this country.

[cardcrimson]

I would suggest that there is no systemic racism (though quotas and possibly law enforcement profiling come to mind), but there certainly is racism in the "system".

[cardcrimson]

I would suggest that there is no systemic racism (though quotas and possibly law enforcement profiling come to mind), but there certainly is racism in the "system".

[Kathy]

One of the more thoughtful pieces I've read from someone who — like 110,000 other people in this town — has to live and work here every day:

http://totalsororitymove.com/i-am-a-whit...udent1950/

[Kathy]

One of the more thoughtful pieces I've read from someone who — like 110,000 other people in this town — has to live and work here every day:

http://totalsororitymove.com/i-am-a-whit...udent1950/

[cardcoug]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Ok, fair enough. I actually didn't read your post carefully enough and missed that the "bury us" language was in both your quote and response, so I didn't see that you were taking that on specifically. I apologize for that and I agree her language is hyperbolic. But I still think your reasoning is off here. Even if the system were "built to bury them", it would not then be impossible for some people to triumph nevertheless. It is possible to overcome obstacles, and overcoming them does not mean that they didn't exist in the first place.

[cardcoug]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Ok, fair enough. I actually didn't read your post carefully enough and missed that the "bury us" language was in both your quote and response, so I didn't see that you were taking that on specifically. I apologize for that and I agree her language is hyperbolic. But I still think your reasoning is off here. Even if the system were "built to bury them", it would not then be impossible for some people to triumph nevertheless. It is possible to overcome obstacles, and overcoming them does not mean that they didn't exist in the first place.

[Rally]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Now, is that same system built to bury Asians and Asian Indians as well? Just another question. . . .

The fact is that IN THE PAST blacks could not, indeed, attend basically any other than black colleges, certainly not the Univ. of Missouri.  Or Harvard.  Or Stanford.  Now they can.  Not to say there isn't still racism, but to imply, whether by hyperbaly or otherwise, that things aren't a lot better is just incorrect.

[Rally]

I don't understand how, when "the system is built to bury us", 'they' could ever be afforded the opportunity to have access to the same 'privilege' as those who 'they' claim are doing the oppressing. Simple as that. I find hyperbole in her comments. That's all.

Now, is that same system built to bury Asians and Asian Indians as well? Just another question. . . .

The fact is that IN THE PAST blacks could not, indeed, attend basically any other than black colleges, certainly not the Univ. of Missouri.  Or Harvard.  Or Stanford.  Now they can.  Not to say there isn't still racism, but to imply, whether by hyperbaly or otherwise, that things aren't a lot better is just incorrect.

[97fan]

I think the focus here on a few specific incidents involving cotton balls and poop swastikas may be misplaced.

I will defer to Kathy on this, because she actually lives in the community. But as someone who grew up in the St. Louis area, I can say that Columbia definitely had a reputation during the '80s and early '90s as a place that was not welcoming to black people. (And St. Louis is not exactly known for its progressive attitudes on race!) The history of Boone County, where Columbia is located, is more similar that of the South than it is to that of the Midwest. Indeed, Columbia is part of a region of Missouri that was long known as "Little Dixie."

All of that said, I'm sure that the university community is far more progressive on race than other parts of Columbia and Boone County are. And it's entirely possible that my perception of Columbia is outdated and unfair. Again, I will defer to Kathy on this.

* None of this should be taken as an endorsement of the protests. I definitely think the protesters have engaged in hyperbole. I don't think that sacking the university chancellor is going to lead to the changes the protesters are seeking. I am troubled by their efforts to stifle others' First Amendment rights. I just think that the underlying conditions they're protesting are being caricatured; what they're protesting goes beyond a few high-profile events, I'm pretty sure.

[97fan]

I think the focus here on a few specific incidents involving cotton balls and poop swastikas may be misplaced.

I will defer to Kathy on this, because she actually lives in the community. But as someone who grew up in the St. Louis area, I can say that Columbia definitely had a reputation during the '80s and early '90s as a place that was not welcoming to black people. (And St. Louis is not exactly known for its progressive attitudes on race!) The history of Boone County, where Columbia is located, is more similar that of the South than it is to that of the Midwest. Indeed, Columbia is part of a region of Missouri that was long known as "Little Dixie."

All of that said, I'm sure that the university community is far more progressive on race than other parts of Columbia and Boone County are. And it's entirely possible that my perception of Columbia is outdated and unfair. Again, I will defer to Kathy on this.

* None of this should be taken as an endorsement of the protests. I definitely think the protesters have engaged in hyperbole. I don't think that sacking the university chancellor is going to lead to the changes the protesters are seeking. I am troubled by their efforts to stifle others' First Amendment rights. I just think that the underlying conditions they're protesting are being caricatured; what they're protesting goes beyond a few high-profile events, I'm pretty sure.

[Kathy]

Your perception is outdated. One of Columbia's nicknames is "Havana on the Hinkson" (Hinkson Creek is one of several waterways that meander through the town on their way to the Missouri River). Yes, the area was known as Little Dixie back in the day (and there's still a lake by that name), but the Civil War ended 150 years ago. Missourians fought for both sides (Columbia was Union, by the way). Blacks have attended MU since 1950.  The MU administration is diverse, the governing Board of Curators is diverse, the MU student council is diverse, the Columbia City Council is diverse, the Columbia school board is diverse. There is program after program in place at multiple levels at the university and in the community to achieve even greater diversity. Sometimes it seems like that's all university administrators do -- create more diversity programs.

Does racism still exist? Absolutely. But the headline-grabbing instances that these activists have glommed onto are not indicative of the atmosphere in this town (well, until this week maybe, as a response to this outrageous chaos engulfing us). The president of the system cannot make insults go away. He cannot increase admission levels of certain groups without lowering standards -- that will take years of effort & improvement in the secondary schools to bring up quality of applicants. Tim Wolfe had been working on that improvement since he got here -- traveling throughout the state, meeting with schools, students, community members, all stakeholders. Geez ... I wonder how far back the Mizzou Advantage program has been set back.

[Kathy]

Your perception is outdated. One of Columbia's nicknames is "Havana on the Hinkson" (Hinkson Creek is one of several waterways that meander through the town on their way to the Missouri River). Yes, the area was known as Little Dixie back in the day (and there's still a lake by that name), but the Civil War ended 150 years ago. Missourians fought for both sides (Columbia was Union, by the way). Blacks have attended MU since 1950.  The MU administration is diverse, the governing Board of Curators is diverse, the MU student council is diverse, the Columbia City Council is diverse, the Columbia school board is diverse. There is program after program in place at multiple levels at the university and in the community to achieve even greater diversity. Sometimes it seems like that's all university administrators do -- create more diversity programs.

Does racism still exist? Absolutely. But the headline-grabbing instances that these activists have glommed onto are not indicative of the atmosphere in this town (well, until this week maybe, as a response to this outrageous chaos engulfing us). The president of the system cannot make insults go away. He cannot increase admission levels of certain groups without lowering standards -- that will take years of effort & improvement in the secondary schools to bring up quality of applicants. Tim Wolfe had been working on that improvement since he got here -- traveling throughout the state, meeting with schools, students, community members, all stakeholders. Geez ... I wonder how far back the Mizzou Advantage program has been set back.

[Rally]

I'm not sure there was ever a time when black students could not enroll at Stanford. Ernest Johnson, a member of the class of 1895, was black. (And he chose us over the 59ers!) Moreover, he was admitted apparently at the personal request of Jane Stanford, which means the policy came right from the top.

That's not to deny that black admissions were seriously under-numbered at Stanford, a fact that the trustees acknowledged in 1968 when they announced a plan to significantly increase black enrollment.

https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/mag...e_id=35525

Okay, and there were highly educated blacks during active, legal slavery as well, but I think my point is valid.  A dear friend, who is black, says there were two blacks in his class (1967) at Stanford, he and a woman.  As he puts it, "I guess they wanted us each to have someone to date.)

[Rally]

I'm not sure there was ever a time when black students could not enroll at Stanford. Ernest Johnson, a member of the class of 1895, was black. (And he chose us over the 59ers!) Moreover, he was admitted apparently at the personal request of Jane Stanford, which means the policy came right from the top.

That's not to deny that black admissions were seriously under-numbered at Stanford, a fact that the trustees acknowledged in 1968 when they announced a plan to significantly increase black enrollment.

https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/mag...e_id=35525

Okay, and there were highly educated blacks during active, legal slavery as well, but I think my point is valid.  A dear friend, who is black, says there were two blacks in his class (1967) at Stanford, he and a woman.  As he puts it, "I guess they wanted us each to have someone to date.)

[BostonCard]

Your perception is outdated. One of Columbia's nicknames is "Havana on the Hinkson" (Hinkson Creek is one of several waterways that meander through the town on their way to the Missouri River). Yes, the area was known as Little Dixie back in the day (and there's still a lake by that name), but the Civil War ended 150 years ago. Missourians fought for both sides (Columbia was Union, by the way). Blacks have attended MU since 1950.  The MU administration is diverse, the governing Board of Curators is diverse, the MU student council is diverse, the Columbia City Council is diverse, the Columbia school board is diverse. There is program after program in place at multiple levels at the university and in the community to achieve even greater diversity. Sometimes it seems like that's all university administrators do -- create more diversity programs.

A credible case can be made that African Americans are dramatically underrepresented among the faculty at Missouri (accounting for 3% of tenure-track-faculty in a state where 12% of the population age 16-64 is Black).

BC

[BostonCard]

Your perception is outdated. One of Columbia's nicknames is "Havana on the Hinkson" (Hinkson Creek is one of several waterways that meander through the town on their way to the Missouri River). Yes, the area was known as Little Dixie back in the day (and there's still a lake by that name), but the Civil War ended 150 years ago. Missourians fought for both sides (Columbia was Union, by the way). Blacks have attended MU since 1950.  The MU administration is diverse, the governing Board of Curators is diverse, the MU student council is diverse, the Columbia City Council is diverse, the Columbia school board is diverse. There is program after program in place at multiple levels at the university and in the community to achieve even greater diversity. Sometimes it seems like that's all university administrators do -- create more diversity programs.

A credible case can be made that African Americans are dramatically underrepresented among the faculty at Missouri (accounting for 3% of tenure-track-faculty in a state where 12% of the population age 16-64 is Black).

BC

[Rally]

[quote author=Kathy link=topic=13558.msg141253#msg141253 date=1447446369]
Your perception is outdated. One of Columbia's nicknames is "Havana on the Hinkson" (Hinkson Creek is one of several waterways that meander through the town on their way to the Missouri River). Yes, the area was known as Little Dixie back in the day (and there's still a lake by that name), but the Civil War ended 150 years ago. Missourians fought for both sides (Columbia was Union, by the way). Blacks have attended MU since 1950.  The MU administration is diverse, the governing Board of Curators is diverse, the MU student council is diverse, the Columbia City Council is diverse, the Columbia school board is diverse. There is program after program in place at multiple levels at the university and in the community to achieve even greater diversity. Sometimes it seems like that's all university administrators do -- create more diversity programs.

A credible case can be made that African Americans are dramatically underrepresented among the faculty at Missouri (accounting for 3% of tenure-track-faculty in a state where 12% of the population age 16-64 is Black).

BC
[/quote]

One takeaway from this is that things are much better for black students now than a few decades ago.  The lower number of tenure track faculty may reflect the reflect the fewer educational opportunities available to blacks when those faculty members where students.  Presumably everyone wants qualified faculty, not just faculty hired based on color.  If that is true then the number of black faculty will trail the number of black students, which is what this implies.  Of course it contains no historical perspective so it is difficult to say.  I am making assumptions.

[Rally]

[quote author=Kathy link=topic=13558.msg141253#msg141253 date=1447446369]
Your perception is outdated. One of Columbia's nicknames is "Havana on the Hinkson" (Hinkson Creek is one of several waterways that meander through the town on their way to the Missouri River). Yes, the area was known as Little Dixie back in the day (and there's still a lake by that name), but the Civil War ended 150 years ago. Missourians fought for both sides (Columbia was Union, by the way). Blacks have attended MU since 1950.  The MU administration is diverse, the governing Board of Curators is diverse, the MU student council is diverse, the Columbia City Council is diverse, the Columbia school board is diverse. There is program after program in place at multiple levels at the university and in the community to achieve even greater diversity. Sometimes it seems like that's all university administrators do -- create more diversity programs.

A credible case can be made that African Americans are dramatically underrepresented among the faculty at Missouri (accounting for 3% of tenure-track-faculty in a state where 12% of the population age 16-64 is Black).

BC
[/quote]

One takeaway from this is that things are much better for black students now than a few decades ago.  The lower number of tenure track faculty may reflect the reflect the fewer educational opportunities available to blacks when those faculty members where students.  Presumably everyone wants qualified faculty, not just faculty hired based on color.  If that is true then the number of black faculty will trail the number of black students, which is what this implies.  Of course it contains no historical perspective so it is difficult to say.  I am making assumptions.

[washingtonismoney]

So, instead of offering snark, as I have earlier in the thread, what if I actually offered some thoughts in reasonably measured tones and see what happens.

1) Let's start with the least controversial statement: in colleges nationwide, many black activists and their non-black sympathizers are marching out of a sense of injustice. They apparently feel that society does not offer the same respect to them as it does to primarily white people.

2) Many people seem to disagree or agree with them on an intuitive, rather than empirical level. That is, statements in their defense or contradicting them seem mainly to revolve around "racism still alive" or "not racist."

3) This is where I have to diverge. I'm black! Intuitively, and empirically, my family, friends, and I know that racism still exists. My family is materially prosperous by any standard. Most white people assume I'm white. So my personal experience is better than most black people, and yet nevertheless I know that there's a frustrating amount ... of...

3a) Semantics are important in this discussion. One of the sticking points for good-hearted people who don't sympathize with these protests is the word racism. They don't like to be called racists. I can understand this. Surely there's a word that can describe what we're after: small incidents, that cumulatively, weigh heavily. It's not fun to be unable to hail a decent cab, or to be mistaken for a waiter. It feels like a personal rejection. Encounter these sorts of incidents frequently enough and you, too, will be displeased in a major way.

3b) Yet many of the people who don't like the word racism also take issue with the new term of art, "microaggression", which describes these incidents. I don't want to suggest any malign intent here, but it is awfully frustrating not to have a word that cleanly describes these particular incidents and their impact. I'd love it if people who don't sympathize with these protests would settle on a word that doesn't offend their sensibilities that we could agree on.

3c) So I'll call them "incidents" as a shorthand.

4) People who are black know that there are many incidents and don't pretend otherwise. Even, say, Clarence Thomas -- who is not exactly fond of most liberal policies to ameliorate racism -- thinks there's a lot of racism out there.

(See: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/05/clare...evolution/)

5) People who do not sympathize with these protests tend to minimize the role of racism, which they seem to define as the virulent racism of Jim Crow.

6) So the main question for people who do not sympathize with these protests: if you believe racism is on the decline, and that it is fading as a major factor in American life, why are black people so convinced of its existence and centrality in their lives? Are they deluded about racism? Is it a massive scheme or conspiracy to foist policy changes upon the public?

7) Nevertheless the non-sympathizers have some compelling points regarding the protestors.

8) The movements, as far as I can tell from afar, are focused on respect. Having a sense of society's respect is very important. It's a sense of being taken seriously. Of knowing that when a police officer talks to you, it is likely to end with his helping you. Many people feel a loss of respect occasionally in their lives. I think it is difficult to appreciate what lacking respect feels like.

9) Nevertheless it is easy to demand respect, harder to receive it, and even more difficult to legislate it.

10) The Mizzou protests, for example, have asked for mandatory classes and ramping-up of hiring for people of color.

11) Yet does anyone believe that classes are what the poop-swastika dude really needed? As if this can be taught through group exercises or whatever. If we knew what to teach to defeat racism, I suspect we would've cured it already. And this says nothing of the free speech suppression, which is pretty dumb. 

12) As you can tell I have a bias to policy and concrete policy. Lead abatement in the inner city. Reforming police overreach. That sort of thing.

13) No one's going to read this post or be convinced, are they?

[washingtonismoney]

So, instead of offering snark, as I have earlier in the thread, what if I actually offered some thoughts in reasonably measured tones and see what happens.

1) Let's start with the least controversial statement: in colleges nationwide, many black activists and their non-black sympathizers are marching out of a sense of injustice. They apparently feel that society does not offer the same respect to them as it does to primarily white people.

2) Many people seem to disagree or agree with them on an intuitive, rather than empirical level. That is, statements in their defense or contradicting them seem mainly to revolve around "racism still alive" or "not racist."

3) This is where I have to diverge. I'm black! Intuitively, and empirically, my family, friends, and I know that racism still exists. My family is materially prosperous by any standard. Most white people assume I'm white. So my personal experience is better than most black people, and yet nevertheless I know that there's a frustrating amount ... of...

3a) Semantics are important in this discussion. One of the sticking points for good-hearted people who don't sympathize with these protests is the word racism. They don't like to be called racists. I can understand this. Surely there's a word that can describe what we're after: small incidents, that cumulatively, weigh heavily. It's not fun to be unable to hail a decent cab, or to be mistaken for a waiter. It feels like a personal rejection. Encounter these sorts of incidents frequently enough and you, too, will be displeased in a major way.

3b) Yet many of the people who don't like the word racism also take issue with the new term of art, "microaggression", which describes these incidents. I don't want to suggest any malign intent here, but it is awfully frustrating not to have a word that cleanly describes these particular incidents and their impact. I'd love it if people who don't sympathize with these protests would settle on a word that doesn't offend their sensibilities that we could agree on.

3c) So I'll call them "incidents" as a shorthand.

4) People who are black know that there are many incidents and don't pretend otherwise. Even, say, Clarence Thomas -- who is not exactly fond of most liberal policies to ameliorate racism -- thinks there's a lot of racism out there.

(See: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/05/clare...evolution/)

5) People who do not sympathize with these protests tend to minimize the role of racism, which they seem to define as the virulent racism of Jim Crow.

6) So the main question for people who do not sympathize with these protests: if you believe racism is on the decline, and that it is fading as a major factor in American life, why are black people so convinced of its existence and centrality in their lives? Are they deluded about racism? Is it a massive scheme or conspiracy to foist policy changes upon the public?

7) Nevertheless the non-sympathizers have some compelling points regarding the protestors.

8) The movements, as far as I can tell from afar, are focused on respect. Having a sense of society's respect is very important. It's a sense of being taken seriously. Of knowing that when a police officer talks to you, it is likely to end with his helping you. Many people feel a loss of respect occasionally in their lives. I think it is difficult to appreciate what lacking respect feels like.

9) Nevertheless it is easy to demand respect, harder to receive it, and even more difficult to legislate it.

10) The Mizzou protests, for example, have asked for mandatory classes and ramping-up of hiring for people of color.

11) Yet does anyone believe that classes are what the poop-swastika dude really needed? As if this can be taught through group exercises or whatever. If we knew what to teach to defeat racism, I suspect we would've cured it already. And this says nothing of the free speech suppression, which is pretty dumb. 

12) As you can tell I have a bias to policy and concrete policy. Lead abatement in the inner city. Reforming police overreach. That sort of thing.

13) No one's going to read this post or be convinced, are they?

[stupac2]

13) No one's going to read this post or be convinced, are they?

People will read it, doubt anyone will be convinced. (Though as someone who's already sympathetic to your views I did think it was a good framing.)

[stupac2]

13) No one's going to read this post or be convinced, are they?

People will read it, doubt anyone will be convinced. (Though as someone who's already sympathetic to your views I did think it was a good framing.)