Let me offer you alternative hypotheses. One is that victimization is determined by the socioeconomic status—basically your wealth and/or ability to demonstrate high-class markers. For example, I doubt that white trailer trash is treated particularly gently by the cops.
Actually I think that’s true too. There’s nothing mutually exclusive about them, as you point out yourself. When I said “disproportionately determined by race” I didn’t mean determined only by race. I’d guess—just a guess, no data—that there’s a gender disproportion too—men are probably more likely to be victims of police brutality even adjusting for their greater likelihood to commit violent crimes. But biases are stackable. A cop who is more likely to be inappropriately violent towards poor people in general might be more likely again to be hard on poor, black people.
Why did you pick race?
I didn’t pick it, that’s what the discussion is about. OP picked it. If it was just a thread about police brutality in general I don’t think I’d have stuck to race alone.
Sure. But a fair number of cops are black. Some of them are racist, right? You are arguing that this must lead to disproportionate impact on non-blacks. Is that so?
Sure, there are black cops, a certain percentage of whom must be racist. I don’t know why I wouldn’t consider that “racism”. So that could lead to a disproportionate impact on non-black people in terms of the actions of those specific cops. But given that A. the black population share is about 13% of America and B. the percentage of cops who are black is lower than that again, I don’t see how the disproportion could be equivalent unless each racist black cop was having ten times the negative impact of each racist white cop—and that’s not even accounting for the possibility of black cops discriminating against black people, because of internalized prejudice or over-correction to avoid the appearance of going easy on members of their own race.
talking specifically about some variation of white supremacism
No, I didn’t have white supremacists specifically in mind, as I think of them—though there must be some white supremacist cops. We might be defining them differently though, I strongly associate white supremacism with some kind of group-membership or at least a very explicit, conscious avowal of racism as right. Someone else might argue that all white racists are white supremacists by definition but I think that would be an oversimplification.
Consider Asians. They are not white and a white supremacist should be strongly biased against them (as indeed white supremacists are). So, are Asians brutalized by police more than whites? No? Why not?
Aren’t they? I have no idea. If not, I’d point out that someone can be biased against different groups while not necessarily treating them the same way. What I’ve seen of white-to-Asian racism in the US it looks more contemptuous and dismissive—negative stereotypes of Asian men seem to revolve around “weak, geeky, submissive”. That kind of view might well lead to less violence than the negative stereotypes about black men.
I’d also like to point out here that I don’t think police brutality is America’s biggest race-problem or even America’s biggest policing problem. I’m actually pretty sympathetic to cops in general, as I am to anyone who does a job I need someone to do but wouldn’t want to do myself. Pointing out that they sometimes do wrong is not to call them all a bunch of fascist pigs or whatever. I think overwork and undiagnosed mental health issues probably played a role in some of their more high-profile fuckups, not just assholery, racism or incompetence.
I didn’t pick it, that’s what the discussion is about.
Well, your original point was that Black Lives Matter is justified in insisting upon Black Lives and that countering with All Lives Matter was a bad thing to do. I would guess that BLM would strongly object to e.g. Poor Lives Matter as well.
I think overwork and undiagnosed mental health issues probably played a role in some of their more high-profile fuckups, not just assholery, racism or incompetence.
The thing is, there are systematic selection biases. People with certain character traits (note: not clinical mental health issues) self-select into specific jobs.
Well, your original point was that Black Lives Matter is justified in insisting upon Black Lives and that countering with All Lives Matter was a bad thing to do. I would guess that BLM would strongly object to e.g. Poor Lives Matter as well.
Maybe they would, but I don’t think I would be quite so quick to dismissive Poor Lives Matter, as they would have legit beef, so to speak.
Actually if a real movement sprung up with the intention of uniting poor blacks and poor whites in a shared resistance to police brutality and systemic injustice generally, that could be a really good thing. And maybe BLM would be pissed, and maybe they would have some reason on certain grounds, but I don’t think I’d dismiss PLM without a hearing.
ALM, on the other hand, is vacuous crap. It’s basically true but that’s where the merit ends. It means nothing, it adds nothing, it represents nothing. Imagine in it in other contexts. Someone’s talking about a cystic fibrosis charity and I respond “all diseases matter!”. Someone’s raising money for Dog’s Trust and I chime in with “all vertebrates matter!”. (This could actually be a fun parody Twitter account if I were trollishly inclined).
The thing is, there are systematic selection biases. People with certain character traits (note: not clinical mental health issues) self-select into specific jobs.
Yes, absolutely, good point. But for jobs like policing, paramedics etc. there’s a high occupational risk of picking up mental health issues on the job too.
Actually I think that’s true too. There’s nothing mutually exclusive about them, as you point out yourself. When I said “disproportionately determined by race” I didn’t mean determined only by race. I’d guess—just a guess, no data—that there’s a gender disproportion too—men are probably more likely to be victims of police brutality even adjusting for their greater likelihood to commit violent crimes. But biases are stackable. A cop who is more likely to be inappropriately violent towards poor people in general might be more likely again to be hard on poor, black people.
I didn’t pick it, that’s what the discussion is about. OP picked it. If it was just a thread about police brutality in general I don’t think I’d have stuck to race alone.
Sure, there are black cops, a certain percentage of whom must be racist. I don’t know why I wouldn’t consider that “racism”. So that could lead to a disproportionate impact on non-black people in terms of the actions of those specific cops. But given that A. the black population share is about 13% of America and B. the percentage of cops who are black is lower than that again, I don’t see how the disproportion could be equivalent unless each racist black cop was having ten times the negative impact of each racist white cop—and that’s not even accounting for the possibility of black cops discriminating against black people, because of internalized prejudice or over-correction to avoid the appearance of going easy on members of their own race.
No, I didn’t have white supremacists specifically in mind, as I think of them—though there must be some white supremacist cops. We might be defining them differently though, I strongly associate white supremacism with some kind of group-membership or at least a very explicit, conscious avowal of racism as right. Someone else might argue that all white racists are white supremacists by definition but I think that would be an oversimplification.
Aren’t they? I have no idea. If not, I’d point out that someone can be biased against different groups while not necessarily treating them the same way. What I’ve seen of white-to-Asian racism in the US it looks more contemptuous and dismissive—negative stereotypes of Asian men seem to revolve around “weak, geeky, submissive”. That kind of view might well lead to less violence than the negative stereotypes about black men.
I’d also like to point out here that I don’t think police brutality is America’s biggest race-problem or even America’s biggest policing problem. I’m actually pretty sympathetic to cops in general, as I am to anyone who does a job I need someone to do but wouldn’t want to do myself. Pointing out that they sometimes do wrong is not to call them all a bunch of fascist pigs or whatever. I think overwork and undiagnosed mental health issues probably played a role in some of their more high-profile fuckups, not just assholery, racism or incompetence.
(Am I allowed say fuckups?)
Well, your original point was that Black Lives Matter is justified in insisting upon Black Lives and that countering with All Lives Matter was a bad thing to do. I would guess that BLM would strongly object to e.g. Poor Lives Matter as well.
The thing is, there are systematic selection biases. People with certain character traits (note: not clinical mental health issues) self-select into specific jobs.
Yes :-D
Maybe they would, but I don’t think I would be quite so quick to dismissive Poor Lives Matter, as they would have legit beef, so to speak.
Actually if a real movement sprung up with the intention of uniting poor blacks and poor whites in a shared resistance to police brutality and systemic injustice generally, that could be a really good thing. And maybe BLM would be pissed, and maybe they would have some reason on certain grounds, but I don’t think I’d dismiss PLM without a hearing.
ALM, on the other hand, is vacuous crap. It’s basically true but that’s where the merit ends. It means nothing, it adds nothing, it represents nothing. Imagine in it in other contexts. Someone’s talking about a cystic fibrosis charity and I respond “all diseases matter!”. Someone’s raising money for Dog’s Trust and I chime in with “all vertebrates matter!”. (This could actually be a fun parody Twitter account if I were trollishly inclined).
Yes, absolutely, good point. But for jobs like policing, paramedics etc. there’s a high occupational risk of picking up mental health issues on the job too.