Frank, I did not call you a racist. I said you and Bob 'routinely defend racism'. That's a different thing, as a nitpicker like you can see.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 5:20:12 AM UTC+2, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> "Pathology" is also a very loaded word, as well, and also makes you sound like a racist.

It's a term from the worst playbook, describing another group as sick outsiders.
And it doesn't matter that it's a black professor providing those terms to white people.

On Thursday, August 12, 2021 at 6:50:26 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 8/12/2021 4:26 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 11, 2021 at 11:32:03 PM UTC-5, Bob Harper wrote:
> >> Michael, I grew up in SE Missouri (Charleston, to be exact) in the '50s
> >> and '60s. There was REAL, OPEN racism then--for example, my high school
> >> was not fully integrated until after I graduated in 1966. My father, one
> >> of the few Republicans in town, lost his bid for election to the local
> >> school board precisely because he was considered...."unreliable" on the
> >> subject of race (i.e., he was not a segregationist).
> >>
> >> That has all changed, and while we have serious societal problems which
> >> have too great an effect on racial minorities, these are not, in the
> >> main, caused by 'white racism', but rather principally by pathologies
> >> within those communities,
> >
> > Followed up to there, "pathologies"- that's an interesting formulation. Anything specific you want to point to?
> >
> > exacerbated by race hustlers like Ibram Kendi.
> >> Al Sharpton, et al who have a vested interest in convincing minorities
> >> that they are victims who lack agency, and thus must follow the
> >> aforementioned 'leaders' to get their 'fair share' of what the world has
> >> to offer.
> >
> > So somwhere along the route where we could document systematic racism in the 50s and 60 to now, it's all just went away and the problem now is minorities wanting things they aren't entitled to? Is that a fair summary? Forget your negative portrayal of minority activists. That seems like small fry compared to this idea that hundreds of years of racist practices, beliefs and culture just disappeared at some point. But if you believe it happened, what were the causes? I mean, there are clear market forces that make societal change risky for power holders, but you think people just embraced change and said "we were wrong".
> >
> > As for biography, I grew up hearing people say "nigger" in Texas of the 80s (and they barely knew what to make of Jews). So again, where do think enlightened non-racism firmly settled in all 50 states?
> >
> Be careful. You are on a path that is likely to end up with your apologizing for over the top rhetoric (again).
>
> You have distorted Bob's arguement egregiously, as you are wont to do.
>
> He did not say that systemic racism suddenlt disappeared. He said it is less now than formerly. As is non-systemic racism, I might add.
> He did not denigrate all minority activists. If you call Al Sharpton Ibram Kendi hustlers a thousand times, you have not denigrated all minority activists. You have denigrated exactly two. If you think it's fair to generalize from that there is something wrong with you. In fact, if you don't think they are hustlers there is something wrong with you. I know what it is; it's wokeness.

Frank, I've had to go back to Bob's original post and the point at which you started telling me I was distorting his argument. What did Bob say about racism as such? He wrote "That has all changed," and then that problems in minority communities are not cause "in the main" by racism. I simplified that too much, but it also seems that with these two comments, there's an open question of whether there is any racism at all in the world. You're heated up about me simplifying that into a formula which I followed up by saying "Is that a fair summary?", which I can only guess you read as being snarky.. But it was sincere. I'm trying to find out to what degree Bob (or you, but I'm not going to confuse you two here) imagines racism still exists, in what ways it manifests itself, and how you would recognize a witness to that racism. I'll have to get back tour other comments to see if we end up addressing that at all.

On 8/13/2021 3:28 AM, Herman wrote:
> Frank, I did not call you a racist. I said you and Bob 'routinely defend racism'. That's a different thing, as a nitpicker like you can see.
>

I have never defended racism. If you can give me an example of my defending racism, I will nitpick it to death.

On Thursday, August 12, 2021 at 11:22:09 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>> But offering it seems to put me in a position now to say: if some racism still exists, then how do you, personally, identify it? Who do you listen to as an authority on inequality?
> Inequality does not indicate current racism, systemic or otherwise. Current inequality is primarily the result of past racism. After hundreds of years of slavery and discrimination, if all racism suddenly disappeared, how long do YOU think it would take for blacks to achieve educational, income and wealth equality with whites?

Even if it is likely that inequality is the result of a historical racism that no longer exists (something I largely agree with), you can't take it as axiomatic that no forms of racism or prejudice currently exist. That may or may not be so, and would simply have to be decided based evidence without the guidance of a belief system.

> I can't see a point to offering up Sharpton unless he's being used to make a generalization. What is the generalization?
> Ask Bob.

Uh, OK, Bob?

> The problem is that you continually say outrageous things and then retract them.

Well, I'll pick a fight there. I haven't said anything outrageous here, and I've only softened my comments a bit. Both you and Bob haven't sketched out much of a framework to imagine that racism can still exist, and won't talk about how you would recognize it if it was there. All you want to defend is the right to behave and mostly think as if it doesn't exist in any meaningful way except in the minds of minorities.

From my point of view, if you are unwilling to imagine that racism could still exist, that's a manifestation of prejudice. I'd stake my life that there have been white people since the 50s saying "I'm not racist; there's nothing wrong with my judgment, and I don't need to change or be sensitive to this idea one bit" which is part of the problem. White resentment at being asked for anything has been with us since forever, but it has been a staple of Republican politics since the realignment of the 70s. And to my mind the absence of empathy and emphasis on freedom ("I'm free, you're free, there is no problem; $%^& off!") perpetuates injustice.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 7:39:44 AM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 3:28 AM, Herman wrote:
> > Frank, I did not call you a racist. I said you and Bob 'routinely defend racism'. That's a different thing, as a nitpicker like you can see.
> >
> I have never defended racism. If you can give me an example of my defending racism, I will nitpick it to death.

I recognize that nothing you write is intended to defend racism, and that you never defend racism as such. There doesn't need to be that accusation. But we can talk about the effects of systems (belief, management, law, whatever) and identify that they have unequal consequences for one reason or another that favor the privileged and ignore the needy. And recognizing that we are no longer talking about you, I'm comfortable with those patterns being called racist.

On 8/13/2021 8:57 AM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, August 12, 2021 at 11:22:09 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>>> But offering it seems to put me in a position now to say: if some racism still exists, then how do you, personally, identify it? Who do you listen to as an authority on inequality?
>> Inequality does not indicate current racism, systemic or otherwise. Current inequality is primarily the result of past racism. After hundreds of years of slavery and discrimination, if all racism suddenly disappeared, how long do YOU think it would take for blacks to achieve educational, income and wealth equality with whites?
>
> Even if it is likely that inequality is the result of a historical racism that no longer exists (something I largely agree with), you can't take it as axiomatic that no forms of racism or prejudice currently exist. That may or may not be so, and would simply have to be decided based evidence without the guidance of a belief system.
>
>> I can't see a point to offering up Sharpton unless he's being used to make a generalization. What is the generalization?
>> Ask Bob.
>
> Uh, OK, Bob?
>
>> The problem is that you continually say outrageous things and then retract them.
>
> Well, I'll pick a fight there. I haven't said anything outrageous here, and I've only softened my comments a bit. Both you and Bob haven't sketched out much of a framework to imagine that racism can still exist, and won't talk about how you would recognize it if it was there. All you want to defend is the right to behave and mostly think as if it doesn't exist in any meaningful way except in the minds of minorities.
>
> From my point of view, if you are unwilling to imagine that racism could still exist, that's a manifestation of prejudice. I'd stake my life that there have been white people since the 50s saying "I'm not racist; there's nothing wrong with my judgment, and I don't need to change or be sensitive to this idea one bit" which is part of the problem. White resentment at being asked for anything has been with us since forever, but it has been a staple of Republican politics since the realignment of the 70s. And to my mind the absence of empathy and emphasis on freedom ("I'm free, you're free, there is no problem; $%^& off!") perpetuates injustice.
>
>

It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree. The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.

On 8/13/2021 9:03 AM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 7:39:44 AM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 8/13/2021 3:28 AM, Herman wrote:
>>> Frank, I did not call you a racist. I said you and Bob 'routinely defend racism'. That's a different thing, as a nitpicker like you can see.
>>>
>> I have never defended racism. If you can give me an example of my defending racism, I will nitpick it to death.
>
> I recognize that nothing you write is intended to defend racism, and that you never defend racism as such. There doesn't need to be that accusation. But we can talk about the effects of systems (belief, management, law, whatever) and identify that they have unequal consequences for one reason or another that favor the privileged and ignore the needy. And recognizing that we are no longer talking about you, I'm comfortable with those patterns being called racist.
>

If I knew what you are talking about I could respond. I don't. There is no political/ideological position I hold that is racist.

In article <44ffe97a-cf0c-40c1-9e4d-37fcd76c2998n@googlegroups.com>,
mswd...@gmail.com <mswdesign@gmail.com> wrote:
>All you want to defend is the right to behave and mostly think as
>if it doesn't exist in any meaningful way except in the minds of
>minorities.

These are a couple of people who join in every time here, whenever
race gets brought up, always to say that people of color have it
wrong. They're liked stopped clocks.

On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>>
>
> It's not a question of whether racism exists.  OF course it does.  I
> don't think Bob would disagree.  The issue, from my point of view, is
> wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's
> inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to
> today's racism.  It isn't.  It is due to past racism.  I don't see what
> is so hard to understand about this.  Most importantly, determining the
> best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly
> assessing it's cause.

I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple
times, and because I received copious publicity.
It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home. They got a
low-ball appraisal. Then they changed all the family photos lying
around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which
went to a far higher figure. This is not past racism.
My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house
on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood. It was like that
old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks,
people listen. Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped
to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house.
Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and
said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
Sure, past racism. Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find
themselves followed around when they shop? How many white people get
arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?

On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It's not a question of whether racism exists.  OF course it does.  I don't think Bob would disagree.  The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism.  It isn't.  It is due to past racism.  I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.  Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
>
> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home.  They got a low-ball appraisal.  Then they changed all the family photos lying around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which went to a far higher figure.  This is not past racism.
> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood.  It was like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen.  Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
> Sure, past racism.  Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find themselves followed around when they shop?  How many white people get arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?

I said racism still exists. I asserted that it was not the primary cause of racial income/wealth inequality.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 9:28:31 AM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree.

Ok, we agree.

The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.

You are free to dislike the excesses and mistakes of your laundry list of offenders. The last sentence may describe your personal interests, but it is not necessarily true where real work is concerned. The path to real solutions is one where compromise greases the wheels. It sounds like you'd rather stay where you are and demand a single truth hold sway.

On 8/13/2021 1:20 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's not a question of whether racism exists.  OF course it does.  I
>>> don't think Bob would disagree.  The issue, from my point of view, is
>>> wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's
>>> inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to
>>> today's racism.  It isn't.  It is due to past racism.  I don't see
>>> what is so hard to understand about this.  Most importantly,
>>> determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality
>>> depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
>>
>> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened
>> multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
>> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home.  They got a
>> low-ball appraisal.  Then they changed all the family photos lying
>> around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal,
>> which went to a far higher figure.  This is not past racism.
>> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a
>> house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood.  It was
>> like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F.
>> Hutton talks, people listen.  Everything in the street stopped, and
>> eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door
>> of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in
>> the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
>> Sure, past racism.  Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find
>> themselves followed around when they shop?  How many white people get
>> arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?
>
> I said racism still exists.  I asserted that it was not the primary
> cause of racial income/wealth inequality.

I don't know--if it were MY family it would be a pretty significant
cause of inequity to me.

On 8/13/2021 1:34 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 9:28:31 AM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>> It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree.
>
> Ok, we agree.
>
> The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
>
> You are free to dislike the excesses and mistakes of your laundry list of offenders. The last sentence may describe your personal interests, but it is not necessarily true where real work is concerned. The path to real solutions is one where compromise greases the wheels. It sounds like you'd rather stay where you are and demand a single truth hold sway.
>

I am not responsible for your misinterpreting what I say nor your, or Herman's, fabrications, intentional or not, of what I mean.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:20:56 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> > On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree. The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
> >
> > I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
> > It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home. They got a low-ball appraisal. Then they changed all the family photos lying around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which went to a far higher figure. This is not past racism.
> > My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood. It was like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen. Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
> > Sure, past racism. Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find themselves followed around when they shop? How many white people get arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?
> I said racism still exists. I asserted that it was not the primary cause of racial income/wealth inequality.

and I can only guess you would feel comfortable saying "... even if these present conditions were strongly shaped by past racism."

I didn't know this was what we were talking about. I thought the question was whether racism matters, and the message I get from you, Frank, is that it is a statistical sideshow that doesn't really matter. The woke, the liberals, the minorities who complain, the chief feature of them for you is that they are wrong.

Go ahead and accuse me of malicious summarizing- you're the one dodging the question while insisting on your own purity.

On 8/13/2021 1:37 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 1:20 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>>> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not a question of whether racism exists.  OF course it does.  I don't think Bob would disagree.  The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism.  It isn't.  It is due to past racism.  I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.  Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
>>>
>>> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
>>> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home.  They got a low-ball appraisal.  Then they changed all the family photos lying around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which went to a far higher figure.  This is not past racism.
>>> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood.  It was like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen.  Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
>>> Sure, past racism.  Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find themselves followed around when they shop?  How many white people get arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?
>>
>> I said racism still exists.  I asserted that it was not the primary cause of racial income/wealth inequality.
>
>
> I don't know--if it were MY family it would be a pretty significant cause of inequity to me.

If it were my family, I would be more likely to blame the disadvantage of my ancestors being enslaved and systematically under-educated. Would it bother me of my neighbor preferred I not live near her or object to my marrying into her family, or experience greater likelihood of being abused by police? Of course.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:39:01 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> I am not responsible for your misinterpreting what I say nor your, or Herman's, fabrications, intentional or not, of what I mean.

That's actually and interesting claim:
"I am not responsible for your misinterpreting what I say"
As a practical matter, the only person who can take responsibility for better communication when someone misinterprets something you say is the speaker, because they are the only person who may have insight into what was intended to be conveyed and what the person seems to have heard. But if what makes you happy is blaming others and announcing your bad faith, then go ahead.

On 8/13/2021 1:46 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:20:56 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>>> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree. The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
>>>
>>> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
>>> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home. They got a low-ball appraisal. Then they changed all the family photos lying around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which went to a far higher figure. This is not past racism.
>>> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood. It was like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen. Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
>>> Sure, past racism. Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find themselves followed around when they shop? How many white people get arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?
>> I said racism still exists. I asserted that it was not the primary cause of racial income/wealth inequality.
>
> and I can only guess you would feel comfortable saying "... even if these present conditions were strongly shaped by past racism."

Huh? That's exactly what I've been saying.

>
> I didn't know this was what we were talking about. I thought the question was whether racism matters, and the message I get from you, Frank, is that it is a statistical sideshow that doesn't really matter. The woke, the liberals, the minorities who complain, the chief feature of them for you is that they are wrong.
>
> Go ahead and accuse me of malicious summarizing- you're the one dodging the question while insisting on your own purity.
>

Malicious summarizing.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:59:14 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 1:46 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:20:56 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> >> On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> >>> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree. The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't.. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
> >>>
> >>> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
> >>> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home. They got a low-ball appraisal. Then they changed all the family photos lying around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which went to a far higher figure. This is not past racism.
> >>> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood. It was like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen. Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
> >>> Sure, past racism. Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find themselves followed around when they shop? How many white people get arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?
> >> I said racism still exists. I asserted that it was not the primary cause of racial income/wealth inequality.
> >
> > and I can only guess you would feel comfortable saying "... even if these present conditions were strongly shaped by past racism."
> Huh? That's exactly what I've been saying.

I'm not arguing, just filling out your thought. It is relevant.

> > I didn't know this was what we were talking about. I thought the question was whether racism matters, and the message I get from you, Frank, is that it is a statistical sideshow that doesn't really matter. The woke, the liberals, the minorities who complain, the chief feature of them for you is that they are wrong.
> >
> > Go ahead and accuse me of malicious summarizing- you're the one dodging the question while insisting on your own purity.
> >
> Malicious summarizing.

Hey, it's nice to see you admit that minorities may be bothered by instances of racism. But let's record your message that it simply can not forgive wrong thinking, and what is most important is that they agree with you on causes, because without that agreement, nothing can be done. What a generous soul you are!

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:48:56 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 1:37 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> > On 8/13/2021 1:20 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
> >> On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> >>> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree. The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't.. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
> >>>
> >>> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
> >>> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home. They got a low-ball appraisal. Then they changed all the family photos lying around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which went to a far higher figure. This is not past racism.
> >>> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood. It was like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen. Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
> >>> Sure, past racism. Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find themselves followed around when they shop? How many white people get arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?
> >>
> >> I said racism still exists. I asserted that it was not the primary cause of racial income/wealth inequality.
> >
> >
> > I don't know--if it were MY family it would be a pretty significant cause of inequity to me.
> If it were my family, I would be more likely to blame the disadvantage of my ancestors being enslaved and systematically under-educated. Would it bother me of my neighbor preferred I not live near her or object to my marrying into her family, or experience greater likelihood of being abused by police? Of course.

Returning to this, I find this response actually fairly inadequate because we have a concrete example of what can only be an institutional pattern- underappraisal of property values based on race. That's hugely relevant to the question of whether institutional racism exists, and all you can do is move the discussion into an area where racism is basically personal injury, not financial. That's a dodge.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 10:02:28 AM UTC-7, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >
> > It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I
> > don't think Bob would disagree. The issue, from my point of view, is
> > wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's
> > inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to
> > today's racism. It isn't. It is due to past racism. I don't see what
> > is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the
> > best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly
> > assessing it's cause.
> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple
> times, and because I received copious publicity.
> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home. They got a
> low-ball appraisal. Then they changed all the family photos lying
> around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which
> went to a far higher figure. This is not past racism.
> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house
> on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood. It was like that
> old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks,
> people listen. Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped
> to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house.
> Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and
> said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
> Sure, past racism. Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find
> themselves followed around when they shop? How many white people get
> arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/11/opinions/black-realtor-and-client-handcuffed-us-racist-history-bailey/index.html

On 8/13/21 12:28 AM, Herman wrote:
> Frank, I did not call you a racist. I said you and Bob 'routinely defend racism'. That's a different thing, as a nitpicker like you can see.
>
A distinction with no real difference, Herman. How exactly has Frank, or
have I, 'routinely defended racism'? I have not, nor has he. You are
guilty of slander.

Bob Harper

On 8/13/2021 2:03 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:59:14 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 8/13/2021 1:46 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 12:20:56 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>> On 8/13/2021 1:02 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>>>>> On 8/13/2021 10:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not a question of whether racism exists. OF course it does. I don't think Bob would disagree. The issue, from my point of view, is wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to today's racism. It isn't. It is due to past racism. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Most importantly, determining the best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly assessing it's cause.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just going to bring up one anecdote, because it's happened multiple times, and because I received copious publicity.
>>>>> It concerns a Black family planning to sell their home. They got a low-ball appraisal. Then they changed all the family photos lying around and got white friends to be around for a second appraisal, which went to a far higher figure. This is not past racism.
>>>>> My late wife told a story of a co-worker, a Black woman showing a house on a nice late afternoon in a lily-white neighborhood. It was like that old E.F. Hutton commercial, where someone says "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen. Everything in the street stopped, and eyeballs snapped to this woman walking up the stairs to the front door of a house. Seeing this, she raised the keys up high, jangled them in the air, and said loudly, "I'M ONLY THE REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON!"
>>>>> Sure, past racism. Do you ever talk to actual Black people who find themselves followed around when they shop? How many white people get arrested for "breaking into" their own house, as Henry Louis Gates did?
>>>> I said racism still exists. I asserted that it was not the primary cause of racial income/wealth inequality.
>>>
>>> and I can only guess you would feel comfortable saying "... even if these present conditions were strongly shaped by past racism."
>> Huh? That's exactly what I've been saying.
>
> I'm not arguing, just filling out your thought. It is relevant.
>
>>> I didn't know this was what we were talking about. I thought the question was whether racism matters, and the message I get from you, Frank, is that it is a statistical sideshow that doesn't really matter. The woke, the liberals, the minorities who complain, the chief feature of them for you is that they are wrong.
>>>
>>> Go ahead and accuse me of malicious summarizing- you're the one dodging the question while insisting on your own purity.
>>>
>> Malicious summarizing.
>
> Hey, it's nice to see you admit that minorities may be bothered by instances of racism.

The fact that you seem to be surprised at that is insulting, of course. And reflects the typical mis-judgement of people on the Right by people on the Left. Just generalizing, you know.

But let's record your message that it simply can not forgive wrong thinking, and what is most important is that they agree with you on causes, because without that agreement, nothing can be done. What a generous soul you are!
>

All I said was the understanding the cause of inequality is important to determining the best policies to eradicate it. As usual, you are attributing something to me that I haven't said.

On 8/13/21 5:29 AM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, August 12, 2021 at 6:50:26 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 8/12/2021 4:26 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, August 11, 2021 at 11:32:03 PM UTC-5, Bob Harper wrote:
>>>> Michael, I grew up in SE Missouri (Charleston, to be exact) in the '50s
>>>> and '60s. There was REAL, OPEN racism then--for example, my high school
>>>> was not fully integrated until after I graduated in 1966. My father, one
>>>> of the few Republicans in town, lost his bid for election to the local
>>>> school board precisely because he was considered...."unreliable" on the
>>>> subject of race (i.e., he was not a segregationist).
>>>>
>>>> That has all changed, and while we have serious societal problems which
>>>> have too great an effect on racial minorities, these are not, in the
>>>> main, caused by 'white racism', but rather principally by pathologies
>>>> within those communities,
>>>
>>> Followed up to there, "pathologies"- that's an interesting formulation. Anything specific you want to point to?
>>>
>>> exacerbated by race hustlers like Ibram Kendi.
>>>> Al Sharpton, et al who have a vested interest in convincing minorities
>>>> that they are victims who lack agency, and thus must follow the
>>>> aforementioned 'leaders' to get their 'fair share' of what the world has
>>>> to offer.
>>>
>>> So somwhere along the route where we could document systematic racism in the 50s and 60 to now, it's all just went away and the problem now is minorities wanting things they aren't entitled to? Is that a fair summary? Forget your negative portrayal of minority activists. That seems like small fry compared to this idea that hundreds of years of racist practices, beliefs and culture just disappeared at some point. But if you believe it happened, what were the causes? I mean, there are clear market forces that make societal change risky for power holders, but you think people just embraced change and said "we were wrong".
>>>
>>> As for biography, I grew up hearing people say "nigger" in Texas of the 80s (and they barely knew what to make of Jews). So again, where do think enlightened non-racism firmly settled in all 50 states?
>>>
>> Be careful. You are on a path that is likely to end up with your apologizing for over the top rhetoric (again).
>>
>> You have distorted Bob's arguement egregiously, as you are wont to do.
>>
>> He did not say that systemic racism suddenlt disappeared. He said it is less now than formerly. As is non-systemic racism, I might add.
>> He did not denigrate all minority activists. If you call Al Sharpton Ibram Kendi hustlers a thousand times, you have not denigrated all minority activists. You have denigrated exactly two. If you think it's fair to generalize from that there is something wrong with you. In fact, if you don't think they are hustlers there is something wrong with you. I know what it is; it's wokeness.
>
> Frank, I've had to go back to Bob's original post and the point at which you started telling me I was distorting his argument. What did Bob say about racism as such? He wrote "That has all changed," and then that problems in minority communities are not cause "in the main" by racism. I simplified that too much, but it also seems that with these two comments, there's an open question of whether there is any racism at all in the world. You're heated up about me simplifying that into a formula which I followed up by saying "Is that a fair summary?", which I can only guess you read as being snarky. But it was sincere. I'm trying to find out to what degree Bob (or you, but I'm not going to confuse you two here) imagines racism still exists, in what ways it manifests itself, and how you would recognize a witness to that racism. I'll have to get back tour other comments to see if we end up addressing that at all.
>
Michael, by 'that has all changed', I meant simply that de jure racial
discrimination (exemplified by Jim Crow laws, for example) has been
abolished. That seems to me an unexceptionable statement.

And I would argue that problems like the high rate of fatherlessness and
violence in minority communities are not caused by 'white racism', but
by well-intentioned, but misguided, attempts to 'help' those minorities
(e.g., the 'War on Poverty' and the ADC--later AFDC, programs), the
result of which was the destruction of the black family.

Is there still racism in the world? Of course there is. There always has
been, and there will be until the end of the world. People in general
are more comfortable around people like them. This is true for all
colors of persons, not simply 'whites'. Some people take this natural
preference too far, and we rightly condemn this when it becomes
invidious discrimination.

As a Catholic, I am commanded to consider all human persons as my
brothers and sisters, and to treat them as the Samaritan did the man
attacked by robbers, but that does not mean that I am to 'like' all
persons equally, any more than all the children in a large family will
feel an equal liking for all their siblings.

I hope that will help.

Bob Harper

On 8/13/21 7:28 AM, Frank Berger wrote:

>
> It's not a question of whether racism exists.  OF course it does.  I
> don't think Bob would disagree.  The issue, from my point of view, is
> wokes/progressives/liberals/Al Sharpton types acting as if today's
> inequality of the races is due primarily, or even importantly, to
> today's racism.  It isn't.  It is due to past racism.  I don't see what
> is so hard to understand about this.  Most importantly, determining the
> best social policy to eliminate racial inequality depends on correctly
> assessing it's cause.

See my later reply to Michael, which largely agrees with you.

Bob Harper