let's talk about the dangerous white culture

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

How did society manage to change in that way on your (adult generation) watch, how did it slip through your fingers, what have you left unchecked?

I don't buy the whole collective responsibility thing, so the "your generation" argument isn't one that I can answer. There are a ton of influences out there -- parents, schools, media, politicians, government, other individual figures of influence, etc. etc. I don't think it's possible to unwrap it to come up with the perfect explanation.

But then, I don't really need to because I'm not advocating a particular society-wide solution. I'm simply stating how things are, with the core point being a relunctance to assign personal responsibility.

[WillWork4NinjaPowers]

Who's Rush Limbaugit?

Is he important?

Im sure you know it's Limbaugh, but couldn't handle refraining from being snarky. I'm on the beach and can't see the screen of my phone with the glare of the sun. My sincerest apology. I'm sure that was so difficult to figure out on your own.

[Slurms McKenzie]

Im sure you know it's Limbaugh, but couldn't handle refraining from being snarky. I'm on the beach and can't see the screen of my phone with the glare of the sun. My sincerest apology. I'm sure that was so difficult to figure out on your own.

Sorry, honestly didn't mean to be snarky.. I genuinely don't know this Limbaugh fella, should have googled before I commented.

My apologies again... I'm Welsh by the way if that goes anyway towads explaining my behaviour

[a free shadow]

I'm sick of people excusing shitty things older teenagers/young adults do by saying "well, we all made mistakes at that age", bleh bleh bleh. Well, guess what. I didn't do a lot of the shit those little fuckers do, and to the extent I broke rules, I would have expected to (and did) take the punishment for it. It actually is possible to be young and responsible, and not young and a dumbshit.

I don't buy the whole collective responsibility thing, so the "your generation" argument isn't one that I can answer. There are a ton of influences out there -- parents, schools, media, politicians, government, other individual figures of influence, etc. etc. I don't think it's possible to unwrap it to come up with the perfect explanation. But then, I don't really need to because I'm not advocating a particular society-wide solution. I'm simply stating how things are, with the core point being a relunctance to assign personal responsibility.

I supposed "people" meant a different group than teenagers/young adults themselves (no snark intended by me), so it is the adult generations that are excusing and I was interested in a speculation on why it is so and how it happened. If it is not a part of this thread, then sorry. If it is, then simply stating how things are is not much of a discussion.

[Sci-2]

Sorry, honestly didn't mean to be snarky.. I genuinely don't know this Limbaugh fella, should have googled before I commented.

My apologies again... I'm Welsh by the way if that goes anyway towads explaining my behaviour

I didn't think you were being snarky.

I assumed you weren't American.

[WillWork4NinjaPowers]

Sorry, honestly didn't mean to be snarky.. I genuinely don't know this Limbaugh fella, should have googled before I commented.

My apologies again... I'm Welsh by the way if that goes anyway towads explaining my behaviour

My apologies! I feel bad. I assumed you were one of those people who dismisses a person over a name being misspelled. My answer then, is he's an awful and polarizing public persona.

[Slurms McKenzie]

My apologies! I feel bad. I assumed you were one of those people who dismisses a person over a name being misspelled. My answer then, is he's an awful and polarizing public persona.

Ah so he's the American Noel Edmonds

No worries :)

[Persicaria]

What happens when a community is stuck in a quagmire of cyclical poverty though? . . .

Seriously though, I can agree with that to an extent. I do think we need some more creative solutions. Personally I'm inclined toward changes in how the school curriculum works . . .

Sigh, you too. Education, like money, is not a magic bullet. How children value that education/are taught to value it affects what they actually get from it. Schools are tasked with a lot these days (providing meals, extended day care and in some cases medical services*). They are assigned roles and responsibilities that do not belong to them. Schools should not be teaching your child values and self-respect, because by their nature they are inadequate for that purpose. If they were to teach values and self-respect they also need to be able to teach you consequence and respect for others, and school really don't have many tools to effectively "punish a child." It has to be a parent or someone else who is close to that child, because ultimately a child will have different teachers and schools; their home environment remains the constant (for better or worse). If you want to improve a poor families life you have to improve it at it's core.

* I have heard stories from one teacher of a child who was sent in several days straight sick and at one point with a fever, parent was called repeatedly, child was sent home early, and sent back the next day because the parent couldn't get out of work. I can see the logic, at least there is a nurse at school, but that puts a lot of people in a bad position: child, classmates, kids with other medical issues, and even the school nurse.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

so it is the adult generations that are excusing and I was interested in a speculation on why it is so and how it happened. If it is not a part of this thread, then sorry. If it is, then simply stating how things are is not much of a discussion.

That's actually a very good question. I really don't know, and I suspect there are again a whole lot of factors involved that may vary from person to person. But there is certainly more of a tendency to blame society for the flaws of individuals than there was, say 35 years ago. And I don't have any data for that other than having lived through it.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

The whole point of the piece was to show how ridiculous it is to expect there to be "white leaders" able to speak for all white Americans, and that it's just as absurd to presume that there are black leaders capable of speaking for all black Americans.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but...

How come when a black American appears to be wronged, there will be all sorts of people coming out of the woodwork to identify with the victim in the name of racial solidarity? We saw the President leap into that with his comments about the white cop supposedly harassing Professor Gates, that rebounded into the "beer summit". And there it was again with Trayvon Martin -- first with saying Trayon could be his son, then saying it could be me, and then saying (or having his surrogates say) it is a larger issue for the black community.

I totally understand your point. But if leaders choose to do that for things like Professor Gates or Trayvon Martin, then why don't some of them speak out on some of the harms inflicted on the black community by other black Americans? I mean, one thing I thought might be cool about having Obama as President is that he could be one hell of a role model for black kids, and could speak out strongly on the need for black Americans to improve their lives in poorer areas, oppose crime, drug use, etc.. But he never did that to any degree.

Now that's fine, because maybe he didn't want to come across as a President more for black Americans. But then actions on those other issues belies that reasoning.

[DanteGabriel]

I totally understand your point. But if leaders choose to do that for things like Professor Gates or Trayvon Martin, then why don't some of them speak out on some of the harms inflicted on the black community by other black Americans? I mean, one thing I thought might be cool about having Obama as President is that he could be one hell of a role model for black kids, and could speak out strongly on the need for black Americans to improve their lives in poorer areas, oppose crime, drug use, etc.. But he never did that to any degree.

Not only has Obama frequently discussed the very things you mention, he has done it to such a degree that Ta Nehisi Coates has criticized him for it:

http://www.theatlant...america/276015/

It is thoughtful, balanced criticism, the kind that is hard to find. I encourage anyone curious about race relations in America to read TNC.

[TerraPrime]

I was in a hurry. I was waiting for a post like this.

I'm sorry you had to rush in the post and were not able to present your views more lucidly than you did, then.

Also, I am a die hard Democrat. If I had testicles, I would rather cut them off than watch Fox news or attend a Tea Party rally.

That has nothing to do with the validity of your complaint, at all. Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican and whether you listen to Limbaugh's show or not wouldn't change the merit of your rant.

I never realized "overly politically correct" was a slogan. Whoever coined it should rethink that. Very hard to chant at a rally.

If you don't think "overly political correct" has been a slogan for conservatives since the 90s then I just don't think you've read enough material from the conservatives. That's pretty much the go-to response they have for anything to do with issues ranging from feminism to homophobia.

I also never realized that advocating pe, arts and music in school,being anti no child left behindbecause it hinders education, and being pro affordable child care after school, was a Rush Limbaugit approved viewpoint.

If only your original post had mentioned these things. But no, it hasn't. It mentioned the world being overly politically correct, that the way your generation was raised was much better than the way this current generation is being raised, that the lack of personal accountability and responsibility is doing this new generation in, and you threw in some hyperbole about a 700 pound woman. it would not be out of place from the keyboard of any number of conservative Republican people, and that doesn't change when it's a solid Democrat who wrote it.

[Exa Inova]

I saw this piece on "All In" when it aired and thought it was a perfect piece of satire. It works, not because it is marginalizing violence in the black community, but because it turns the mirror on all those cable news blowhards who ask why "black leaders speaking for the black community" don't speak out against "roving black mobs" out there attacking decent white folk.

The whole point of the piece was to show how ridiculous it is to expect there to be "white leaders" able to speak for all white Americans, and that it's just as absurd to presume that there are black leaders capable of speaking for all black Americans.

I thought the same thing.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but...

How come when a black American appears to be wronged, there will be all sorts of people coming out of the woodwork to identify with the victim in the name of racial solidarity? We saw the President leap into that with his comments about the white cop supposedly harassing Professor Gates, that rebounded into the "beer summit". And there it was again with Trayvon Martin -- first with saying Trayon could be his son, then saying it could be me, and then saying (or having his surrogates say) it is a larger issue for the black community.

I totally understand your point. But if leaders choose to do that for things like Professor Gates or Trayvon Martin, then why don't some of them speak out on some of the harms inflicted on the black community by other black Americans? I mean, one thing I thought might be cool about having Obama as President is that he could be one hell of a role model for black kids, and could speak out strongly on the need for black Americans to improve their lives in poorer areas, oppose crime, drug use, etc.. But he never did that to any degree.

Now that's fine, because maybe he didn't want to come across as a President more for black Americans. But then actions on those other issues belies that reasoning.

Someone already reacted to your post. But I have a Trayvon related question. Since 'rebellious' (or dumb) teenager behavior isnt an exclusive thing for one race, are there reports of white teen boys getting shot by other people (of whatever color) under the stand your ground law? Because I think that if there are similar reports it would be some proof that the law and conscious or unconscious profiling doesnt lead to more black deaths.

[Littlefingers In The Air]

How is one thing that friends of yours were doing (we'll take your word that this is actually what they did and said) indicative of a trend? If it's the trend of "dumb people will do dumb things" -- that's one thing, but I don't see how this is tied to any particular movement.

Back when I was volunteering to canvas on behalf of one Democratic candidate, we were given a lot of very explicit instructions not to mess with anyone's signs and to be perfectly polite and courteous to canvassers working for other candidates. I'd say that's more indicative of some "liberal trend" than whatever douchie actions you can ascribe to some people you know.

It's not the only thing of that nature done by people around here, it's just the only example I gave because it's the most extreme thing that's happened in my own inner circle. And, of course, I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge that it happens on the other side of the spectrum as well. But, as someone who is living around mostly liberals, stupid things done and said by the political left are what I'm mostly exposed to.

[DanteGabriel]

Oh. well, if we're going to extrapolate trends to all liberal-dom on the basis of what our friends do, my friends are awesome liberals. They do smart things that I am sure make up for the dumb things done by your local liberals.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

If you don't think "overly political correct" has been a slogan for conservatives since the 90s then I just don't think you've read enough material from the conservatives. That's pretty much the go-to response they have for anything to do with issues ranging from feminism to homophobia.

Well, I'm a conservative, and I've heard "politically correct" used many times. But I don't think I've ever heard "overly political correct" used as a particuar slogan.

If only your original post had mentioned these things. But no, it hasn't. It mentioned the world being overly politically correct, that the way your generation was raised was much better than the way this current generation is being raised, that the lack of personal accountability and responsibility is doing this new generation in, and you threw in some hyperbole about a 700 pound woman. it would not be out of place from the keyboard of any number of conservative Republican people, and that doesn't change when it's a solid Democrat who wrote it.

Just because a Republican may say something doesn't automatically make it untrue. Shocking, I know. In fact, I'd say your criticisms of her post make the point. You didn't address any of the merits of the points she made. Instead, you just played the guilt by association card. "Don't speak unpleasant truths, because that will make you a bad person. Even a Republican!"

She essentially complained about hypersensitivity, and a societal penchant for diminishing the role of personal responsibility. Just because someone hold those opinions doesn't mean they're in favor of back-alley abortions, hate the poor, are homophobic, or hold any other opinions commonly ascribed to Republicans. Nor do her criticisms imply there aren't things that give legitimate offense rather than being a product of hypersensitivity or political correctness run amok. But that's the mud you tossed on her opinions in an effort to squelch them and avoid discussion of the underlying issues.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Not only has Obama frequently discussed the very things you mention, he has done it to such a degree that Ta Nehisi Coates has criticized him for it:

http://www.theatlant...america/276015/

It is thoughtful, balanced criticism, the kind that is hard to find. I encourage anyone curious about race relations in America to read TNC.

That's a good article, and I'm glad to see that the President has done that. But damn, I've never heard any of that reported on TV or given any significant media coverage, and I do wish he'd be a bit more pointed on the issue of crime in black neighborhoods.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Someone already reacted to your post. But I have a Trayvon related question. Since 'rebellious' (or dumb) teenager behavior isnt an exclusive thing for one race, are there reports of white teen boys getting shot by other people (of whatever color) under the stand your ground law?

I have no idea. I hadn't heard of any such reports prior to the Trayvon Martin case, and I'm sure he wasn't the first black kid shot. And again, the weird thing about that whole thing is that people keep talking about it being a "Stand Your Ground" case, but it wasn't. That law had absolutely nothing to do with the case, and was never invoked by the defense.

Because I think that if there are similar reports it would be some proof that the law and conscious or unconscious profiling doesnt lead to more black deaths.

I didn't quite follow that. Sorry.

[Balefont]

At least watch The Wire to get some kind of idea what the police actually are, crime doesn't decrease through police presence,

Actually, the July 20, 2013 issue of The Economist did an extensive piece on the fall in crime and one of the articles stated and supported that increased police presence does in fact drive down the incidents of criminal activity.

Hot fuzz

A combination of officers talking to the people whose neighbourhoods they police and intensive targeting of crime “hotspots” has transformed the way streets are protected. In the 1990s, Mr Bratton embraced data-driven “CompStat” policing, targeting the most blighted districts with huge numbers of officers. The biggest subsequent crime drops were extremely localised: for example, in the area around Canal Street in Lower Manhattan, the murder rate fell from 29 per 100,000 residents in 1990 to around 1.5 by 2009.

According to Lawrence Sherman, a criminologist at the University of Cambridge, such tactics have now worked in places as different as Sweden and Trinidad and Tobago. In Chicago, where crime has been slower to fall than elsewhere, local politicians this year thanked hotspot methods for the lowest murder rate in half a century. Technology has improved the effectiveness of detective work too. The advent of DNA testing, mobile-phone location and surveillance cameras—which have spread rapidly, especially in Britain—have all increased the risk of getting caught.

[DanteGabriel]

That's a good article, and I'm glad to see that the President has done that. But damn, I've never heard any of that reported on TV or given any significant media coverage, and I do wish he'd be a bit more pointed on the issue of crime in black neighborhoods.

I'm not sure what you're asking for from Obama. According to TNC, he hits this theme whenever he addresses mostly-black audiences, like graduation at historically black colleges. If you're not seeing coverage, I'd say that's a fault in the mainstream media for not covering it more, or perhaps your own media consumption doesn't bring you to places where you read about these things. I've known about this critique of Obama for years. It's not a new critique.

You want him to be more pointed on crime in black neighborhoods? He's been saying plenty, to the degree that people further along the spectrum than TNC have been calling him a sellout, saying he's done nothing for black America. You want him to go off about it during a State of the Union? He's more engaged on race relations than any President in living memory and his stance has been more Bill Cosby than Louis Farrakhan. What more is he supposed to do? Or is he that mystical (half) black man that's responsible for how all black people behave?