The other side of the aisle

theworldismine13

God Emperor of SOHH
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
22,717
Reputation
555
Daps
22,631
Reppin
Arrakis
People obviously have a right to think what they want, but let's not act like a society with a bunch of silent/passive racism is ok just because people may not say what they think out loud. In fact it may be worse since it's harder to do anything about.

You can have situations where people may not be "assaulting" each other, but passive 'cism could still come into play when it comes to things like getting jobs, loans, housing, etc. Politicians may advocate policies that are intended to be disadvantageous to certain groups (ie. voter ID laws and literacy test) etc.

So I can't really agree at all with the idea that racism is ok/acceptable as long as there's not violence.

I think a better way to frame it is 'individual rights' as long as somebody isn't violating your individual rights then it's ok for them to have whatever opinion they want

In other words I don't think we need to fight racism per we we need to fight for individual rights
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,713
Reputation
3,983
Daps
110,008
Reppin
Detroit
I think a better way to frame it is 'individual rights' as long as somebody isn't violating your individual rights then it's ok for them to have whatever opinion they want

In other words I don't think we need to fight racism per we we need to fight for individual rights

The problem with that is that opinions lead to actions, and every issue doesn't always come down to a specific individual. This article is old, but here's an example of what I mean -

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/nyregion/15subprime.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Study Finds Disparities in Mortgages by Race

Home buyers in predominantly black and Hispanic neighborhoods in New York City were more likely to get their mortgages last year from a subprime lender than home buyers in white neighborhoods with similar income levels, according to a new analysis of home loan data by researchers at New York University.

The analysis, by N.Y.U.’s Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy, illustrates stark racial differences between the New York City neighborhoods where subprime mortgages — which can come with higher interest rates, fees and penalties — were common and those where they were rare. The 10 neighborhoods with the highest rates of mortgages from subprime lenders had black and Hispanic majorities, and the 10 areas with the lowest rates were mainly non-Hispanic white.
The analysis showed that even when median income levels were comparable, home buyers in minority neighborhoods were more likely to get a loan from a subprime lender.

In Jamaica, Queens, for example, where the majority is black and the median household income was $45,000 in 2005, 46 percent of the mortgages were issued by lenders who specialize in subprime loans, the second highest rate in the city. In Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, which had a median income of $50,000 and is mostly white, the rate was among the lowest in the city, with 3.6 percent of home loans coming from subprime lenders.

The analysis provides only a limited picture of subprime borrowing in New York City. The data does not include details on borrowers’ assets, down payments or debt loads, all key factors in mortgage lending. And comparing neighborhoods is inexact; the typical borrower in one may differ from a typical borrower in another.

Jay Brinkmann, an economist with the Mortgage Bankers Association, said there was not enough information in the Furman Center analysis and other studies on the issue to draw conclusions about whether subprime lenders were discriminating against minority home buyers. One of the crucial missing pieces is the credit histories of individual borrowers, he said.

But the Furman Center study, a summary of which is being released today, still raises questions about the role of race in lending practices. A separate analysis of mortgage data by The New York Times shows that even at higher income levels, black borrowers in New York City were far more likely than white borrowers with similar incomes and mortgage amounts to receive a subprime loan.

“It’s almost as if subprime lenders put a circle around neighborhoods of color and say, ‘This is where we're going to do our thing,’” said Robert Stroup, a lawyer and the director of the economic justice program at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc.

The New York State Division of Human Rights is investigating whether subprime lenders have been engaging in discriminatory practices by singling out minority communities.

The Furman Center analysis is based on 2006 data that lenders disclosed under the federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act.

The study focused on mortgages issued by lenders identified by federal housing officials as subprime specialists in 2005. The list is made up of 210 companies, including major mortgage lenders like HSBC Mortgage Services and CitiFinancial, the consumer finance unit of Citigroup. But some lenders not included in the list may issue subprime loans, and not every loan made by the specialized lenders is subprime.

Even so, housing and civil rights advocates said the findings highlight lending patterns that have long troubled them.

They say minority communities whose financing needs were starved decades ago because of redlining — banks’ refusal to offer loans or other services in minority areas — are now singled out for high-cost, high-risk mortgages in a kind of reverse redlining.

Any loan that carried an interest rate more than 3 percentage points above the prevailing rate for long-term Treasury bonds was considered a subprime mortgage. In 2006, Treasury rates ranged from 4.5 to 5.3 percent. Prime mortgage interest rates averaged 6.1 to 6.8 percent, according to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation.

Subprime loans are typically made to borrowers with credit histories that the mortgage industry considers less than prime. They can carry higher interest rates than traditional loans or adjustable rates that can make the mortgage difficult to repay once the interest rate resets. They can also carry higher fees and prepayment penalties and thus are at a high risk for foreclosure.

Kumiki Gibson, the commissioner of the State Division of Human Rights, acknowledged last week that her agency was investigating subprime lenders, but she said she could not discuss the details. “There was enough data to compel us to look into this,” Ms. Gibson said.

She said a variety of lending practices and patterns could be considered unlawful discrimination, like a mortgage broker who works only in certain neighborhoods or who offers white borrowers better rates than similarly qualified black or Hispanic customers. Many mortgages are handled by brokers who work as a liaison between borrowers and lenders and earn a fee.

I don't want to go into the specifics of that, but if home buyers in black/hispanic neighborhoods tend to be treated differently by lenders than home buyers in white neighborhoods (even if income is about the same), isn't that an issue? But it's not necessarily a violation of anyone's "Individual rights" per se - it's just generalized differential treatment that may or may not apply to one particular individual. These are the kinds of issues that will pop up in a society where implicit racism is seen as ok as long as nobody is individually being hurt.
 

Ghost Utmost

The Soul of the Internet
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
20,049
Reputation
8,509
Daps
72,822
Reppin
the Aether
People obviously have a right to think what they want, but let's not act like a society with a bunch of silent/passive racism is ok just because people may not say what they think out loud. In fact it may be worse since it's harder to do anything about.

You can have situations where people may not be "assaulting" each other, but passive 'cism could still come into play when it comes to things like getting jobs, loans, housing, etc. Politicians may advocate policies that are intended to be disadvantageous to certain groups (ie. voter ID laws and literacy test) etc.

So I can't really agree at all with the idea that racism is ok/acceptable as long as there's not violence.

I like to imagine my perfect world. I am actually writing a book with no white people at all. No explaination as to where they went and no reference to them. It's fun...

Out here tho.. racism isn't right or wrong it just exists. Our only concern is to not allow ourselves to be abused. Someone denying you a job at the company they built is not abusing you. Someone being forced to have you on their payroll might be abusing them.
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,713
Reputation
3,983
Daps
110,008
Reppin
Detroit
I like to imagine my perfect world. I am actually writing a book with no white people at all. No explaination as to where they went and no reference to them. It's fun...

Out here tho.. racism isn't right or wrong it just exists. Our only concern is to not allow ourselves to be abused. Someone denying you a job at the company they built is not abusing you. Someone being forced to have you on their payroll might be abusing them.

Again though, not all abuses are at the individual level. And I don't think most people have the luxury of just pretending people that affect them don't exist.

If somebody doesn't want to hire me? Whatever, I'll apply elsewhere. But what if, say, Walmart (the largest employer in the US) decided they didn't care to hire black people anymore? Would that be ok? After all, Walmart wouldn't be violating anyone's individual rights and they didn't commit violence against anybdoyd.
 

Calmye

Cali born Cali bred
Supporter
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
17,133
Reputation
-4,755
Daps
33,997
Reppin
So. Cal
I'd post a direct link, but no good could come from that...:wtb:

You're likely thinking of discrimination, not racism... The two are wholly different to cacs, and I think they may technically be correct... :lupe::manny:

Here are the comments that followed... :pachaha:

- Racism is bad only when it is held by white people.

- What if someone walked around declaring their annoyance or dislike of people with green eyes? People would just consider them weird, not the worst person in the world. If he or she harmed green-eyed persons they would decry him as a criminal for murdering innocents, not because of his motives for doing so.

- it's okay to be a white person racist against a particular black person on the basis that that black person is both black and fails to endorse the Democrats. It's okay to be racist in believing that "black people are inherently inferior and could not survive without the guidance of the State."

- Because HITLER

- Seriously, asking why racism is wrong is the easiest way to explode liberal heads. They don't know!

- its the institutionalized heteropatriarchial white male privilege resulting from centuries of exclusively white male dominance. All members of the now exposed white male ruling class share this privilege. The genie is out of the bottle. Most of us will never realize it until we become liberals

- Tell all those little white boys who dream of playing in the NBA that they have every bit as good a chance as anyone else.

-
racism itself isn't "wrong", its the discrimination that follows it that is wrong. The two have appeared side by side so many times throughout history, that they are seen as one in the same, and I'd say rightfully so.
- Why is the discrimination that follows it wrong?

- I have no problem with discrimination. NONE.

- I could be wrong Charles, but I took that to refer more to violent acts than discrimination in general.

- Gary, if some bigot wants to deny you employment (at his business), or some bigot wants to refuse you service at (his) Ice Cream joint, who is he harming?

- The perception of racism was not shaped by unfair hiring practices...

- Wow, It does come across as douche/disingenuous to see a white gay say, "I have no problem with discrimination" lol

-
I see a big problem with it, but don't think anything should be done(legislatively) to combat or compensate for it.
- I have no problem with discrimination because it's inherent to objective reality. If the Lemur cannot discriminate between poisonous and nutritious food, it's going to die. I don't value racially-based discrimination as I find it provides _zero_ value to anyone participating in it; unsurprising as it's irrational to begin with.

:what:1) why the fukk is this funny to you
2) why are you protecting the post so much that you can't even name the website.
3) Why are you even on a site where the majority of the post think you are inferior to them.
4) It seems like you actually agree with what they are saying in some strange way.

You seem like a vary sad and confused man
:beli:
 

theworldismine13

God Emperor of SOHH
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
22,717
Reputation
555
Daps
22,631
Reppin
Arrakis
The problem with that is that opinions lead to actions, and every issue doesn't always come down to a specific individual. This article is old, but here's an example of what I mean -

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/nyregion/15subprime.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0



I don't want to go into the specifics of that, but if home buyers in black/hispanic neighborhoods tend to be treated differently by lenders than home buyers in white neighborhoods (even if income is about the same), isn't that an issue? But it's not necessarily a violation of anyone's "Individual rights" per se - it's just generalized differential treatment that may or may not apply to one particular individual. These are the kinds of issues that will pop up in a society where implicit racism is seen as ok as long as nobody is individually being hurt.

Well yeah if you can prove that is occurring systematically then yeah it is a violation of your individual rights and economic rights, there is nothing that I'm saying that precludes civil rights laws

I make the differentiation because I think it's important to understand that we can be succesful even if white people hate us, I think it can be corrosive in the long term if we think that our future is dependent on whether white people like us

IMO black people have confused fighting racism with having an economic plan, to the point where fighting racism IS the economic plan, this is the wrong path

I'm all for suing said company but the fundemantal reaction by black people to that story should be forming our own banks
 
Last edited:

Ghost Utmost

The Soul of the Internet
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
20,049
Reputation
8,509
Daps
72,822
Reppin
the Aether
Again though, not all abuses are at the individual level. And I don't think most people have the luxury of just pretending people that affect them don't exist.

If somebody doesn't want to hire me? Whatever, I'll apply elsewhere. But what if, say, Walmart (the largest employer in the US) decided they didn't care to hire black people anymore? Would that be ok? After all, Walmart wouldn't be violating anyone's individual rights and they didn't commit violence against anybdoyd.

Yes. On a purely absolute moral level Wal Mart has a right to refuse to hire blacks (which comes along with black people boycotting as well a other groups - undermine their ultimate goal: market share).

The propper response is for a black person to found a huge employer and employ all black people.

If they can give you a job they can always take it away later. You make your own job ...

Also, it's great that niqqas get welfare (straight up checks, housing, food, spots in schools and corporations) but we are not owed welfare. Your black azz is SO FORTUNATE that the wgite people are so generous.

If we were smart we'd build something to withstand the winds of politics. Instead of worrying about them hiring you, we should have them coming to us looking for jobs. Anything less is just living in your grandmas basement. You better not make too much noise or your azz is out. Also, granny might not give you unlimited time to get on your feet. Eventually she might get tired of carrying you.
 

DEAD7

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
51,030
Reputation
4,456
Daps
89,107
Reppin
Fresno, CA.
:what:1) why the fukk is this funny to you
2) why are you protecting the post so much that you can't even name the website.
3) Why are you even on a site where the majority of the post think you are inferior to them.
4) It seems like you actually agree with what they are saying in some strange way.

You seem like a vary sad and confused man
:beli:
1- The contrast is funny to me, not the racism :whoa: and its exactly why I shared it.

2- No good could come from that.

3- The opportunity to change the opinion of one person is worth the time to me, and definitely more intriguing than the circle jerk most people prefer with no voices of dissent/opposition.

4- I understand what they are saying, that isnt the same as agreeing. Although I' beginning to see it the same thing here on HL:ehh:
 

ghostwriterx

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
6,714
Reputation
770
Daps
14,213
Well yeah if you can prove that is occurring systematically then yeah it is a violation of your individual rights and economic rights, there is nothing that I'm saying that precludes civil rights laws

I make the differentiation because I think it's important to understand that we can be succesful even if white people hate us, I think it can be corrosive in the long term if we think that our future is dependent on whether white people like us

IMO black people have confused fighting racism with having an economic plan, to the point where fighting racism IS the economic plan, this is the wrong path

I'm all for suing said company but the fundemantal reaction by black people to that story should be forming our own banks

Yeah cuz that's easy to do in a system that discriminates against blacks.:russ::stopitslime:
 

theworldismine13

God Emperor of SOHH
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
22,717
Reputation
555
Daps
22,631
Reppin
Arrakis
Yeah cuz that's easy to do in a system that discriminates against blacks.:russ::stopitslime:


never said it was easy, i said that has to be the goal and the plan, ultimately if the fate of black people depends on white people, i can safely say we are doomed, that is my point

im not fuking with any ideology that puts the fate of black people in white hands
 

Calmye

Cali born Cali bred
Supporter
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
17,133
Reputation
-4,755
Daps
33,997
Reppin
So. Cal
1- The contrast is funny to me, not the racism :whoa: and its exactly why I shared it.

2- No good could come from that.

3- The opportunity to change the opinion of one person is worth the time to me, and definitely more intriguing than the circle jerk most people prefer with no voices of dissent/opposition.

4- I understand what they are saying, that isnt the same as agreeing. Although I' beginning to see it the same thing here on HL:ehh:
How so? Pointing out that Cacs opinion on hip-hop is inferior then the people who actually make it live it and understand isn't the same as thinking there whole race is inferior. ... that is if that's what you were referring too
 

ghostwriterx

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
6,714
Reputation
770
Daps
14,213
never said it was easy, i said that has to be the goal and the plan, ultimately if the fate of black people depends on white people, i can safely say we are doomed, that is my point

im not fuking with any ideology that puts the fate of black people in white hands

acknowledging racism and its effects is not equal to putting our fate in the hands of white people
 

ghostwriterx

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
6,714
Reputation
770
Daps
14,213
ok, we have acknowledged racism and its effects, what's next?

I think any approach that doesn't involve trying to eliminate/lessen the effects of racism is flawed. Mind you I'm talking about systemic issues like drug sentencing laws/prison industrial complex/bank lending practices/voter suppression and not bs like Duck Dynasty.
 

theworldismine13

God Emperor of SOHH
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
22,717
Reputation
555
Daps
22,631
Reppin
Arrakis
I think any approach that doesn't involve trying to eliminate/lessen the effects of racism is flawed. Mind you I'm talking about systemic issues like drug sentencing laws/prison industrial complex/bank lending practices/voter suppression and not bs like Duck Dynasty.

im not sure what that means but it sounds like your idea is to go and demand that white people stop being racist
 
Top