On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 8:27:35 PM UTC+2, Bob Harper wrote:

> >
> 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

Well, clearly you and Frank are the arbiters of these matters, the judge and the jury, so why ask?

TBH, as a white 66-year old man, having been the benefactor of white male privilege (without expressly seeking it, other than when looking for a good restaurant table) it would not enter my mind to say of myself I am 100 % sqeaky clean of all race prejudices, nor would I feel comfortable claiming other forms of moral excellence for myself, but hey, that's just me.

And, about "slander" - you are aware you're on the internet, a place without jurisdiction where people call each other the most awful names, which I never do?

On 8/13/2021 2:17 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> 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.

>

Actually, what we have is an anecdote. And your distorting my "racism used to be worse than it is today" into "there is no racism today" is simply dishonest. Do you really think that the systematic under-appraising of property values based on race is anywhere near as important a factor in racial income inequality as slavery? Really? Does civil right legislation not make such behavior illegal? Are there many cases of prosecution for under-appraisal based on race? If there are, it ought to be a deterrent. If not, why not? Because it's hard to prove? Does this not suggest that investing in improving the education of the disadvantaged is a more likely to be a more effective social policy than legislating against bigotry?

On 8/13/2021 2:27 PM, Bob Harper wrote:
> 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

I predict he will never provide a single example. You would think that with such a serious accusation as "defending racism" he would have many example at his fingertips. He's probably combing the RMCR archives looking for something.

On 8/13/2021 2:51 PM, Bob Harper wrote:
> 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 Harpe
There you go, defending racism again.

On 8/13/2021 2:56 PM, Herman wrote:
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 8:27:35 PM UTC+2, Bob Harper wrote:
>
>>>
>> 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
>
> Well, clearly you and Frank are the arbiters of these matters, the judge and the jury, so why ask?
>

No, we state our opinions, just as you do.

> TBH, as a white 66-year old man, having been the benefactor of white male privilege (without expressly seeking it, other than when looking for a good restaurant table) it would not enter my mind to say of myself I am 100 % sqeaky clean of all race prejudices, nor would I feel comfortable claiming other forms of moral excellence for myself, but hey, that's just me.
>
> And, about "slander" - you are aware you're on the internet, a place without jurisdiction where people call each other the most awful names, which I never do?
>

An accusation of defending racism (especially without any context or example) is as bad as calling me a name, you piece of shit.

On 8/13/21 12:11 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 2:51 PM, Bob Harper wrote:
>> 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
> There you go, defending racism again.

:)

You mean, being human again.

Bob Harper

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 2:00:19 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:

> Actually, what we have is an anecdote. And your distorting my "racism used to be worse than it is today" into "there is no racism today" is simply dishonest.

No, it is simply based on what you show us you want to talk about and what you don't.

Do you really think that the systematic under-appraising of property values based on race is anywhere near as important a factor in racial income inequality as slavery?

No- I don't contest the fact of that, but I'm no there to talk about that at the expense of minimizing the lived reality of minorities right now.

Really? Does civil right legislation not make such behavior illegal? Are there many cases of prosecution for under-appraisal based on race? If there are, it ought to be a deterrent. If not, why not? Because it's hard to prove? Does this not suggest that investing in improving the education of the disadvantaged is a more likely to be a more effective social policy than legislating against bigotry?

I'd be in favor of a national reparations program that gave free or heavily subsidized education to descendants of slaves. How about you? But it hardly addresses the inequalities that are baked into the system when we expose poor peopele to more pollution, fewer community resources, and so forth. Education is just a small part of things.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 1:51:25 PM UTC-5, Bob Harper wrote:
> 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.

Correct- I appreciate you filling this out.
> 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.

I can't get on board with this cause and effect, but I will acknowledge there are features of these communities that indicate a lack of progress. We both see that.

> 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.

Well said.

> 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

It does! There's no point in arguing about where we see the causes if we are all willing to state that there are problems that need fixing, and be willing to admit the conditions are complex and difficult to solve. I'm open to all manner of solutions, and we don't need to agree about everything if we are open to trying something different with a genuine interest in results.. Solutions first, beliefs second- we shouldn't be demanding that we all see eye-to-eye.

For myself, I remain interested in keeping an open mind about where and when the history of racism may express itself- and even the possibility that some racism can just a function of market forces (like the anecdote about the black family selling their home- this may not even have been intentional, but the result is one where skin color proved to play into the economics of the situation, and that was wrong).

Appreciate the reply.

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 10:34:35 PM UTC+2, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
>

> I can't get on board with this cause and effect, but I will acknowledge there are features of these communities that indicate a lack of progress. We both see that.

I am so curious whether you are just as willing to scrutinize and now-now talk about the pathologies in white communities.

In article <5dedb45e-d595-4d6f-b0e4-d2ef82b1eaben@googlegroups.com>,
Herman <herstx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I am so curious whether you are just as willing to scrutinize and
>now-now talk about the pathologies in white communities.

Maybe their unwillingness to listen to new music by even white
composers? ;-)

On 8/13/2021 4:23 PM, mswd...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 2:00:19 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>
>> Actually, what we have is an anecdote. And your distorting my "racism used to be worse than it is today" into "there is no racism today" is simply dishonest.
>
> No, it is simply based on what you show us you want to talk about and what you don't.
>
> Do you really think that the systematic under-appraising of property values based on race is anywhere near as important a factor in racial income inequality as slavery?
>
> No- I don't contest the fact of that, but I'm no there to talk about that at the expense of minimizing the lived reality of minorities right now.
>
> Really? Does civil right legislation not make such behavior illegal? Are there many cases of prosecution for under-appraisal based on race? If there are, it ought to be a deterrent. If not, why not? Because it's hard to prove? Does this not suggest that investing in improving the education of the disadvantaged is a more likely to be a more effective social policy than legislating against bigotry?
>
> I'd be in favor of a national reparations program that gave free or heavily subsidized education to descendants of slaves. How about you? But it hardly addresses the inequalities that are baked into the system when we expose poor peopele to more pollution, fewer community resources, and so forth. Education is just a small part of things.
>

If you are saying that global warming is more important than social equity, you could be right. If you are saying that poor people will suffer more from global warming than rich people you are right. It sucks to be poor. That black people are more likely to be poor than white people doesn't make global warming racist.

I would be in favor of social policies, if they can be devised, that would try to reduce or eliminate educational opportunity differences. I wouldn't choose to call it reparations, as that term connotes to me that I am some way responsible for their disadvantage, when I am not. If you can find an ancestor of mine that owned or traded in slaves that would be be another matter. But since my ancestors were serfs in Eastern Europe as far back as I can trace them, that is not likely. But I do believe that all citizens are entitled to equal educational opportunities. But the damage caused to Black socio/economic condition by White brudality can not be undone in a generation, no matter what social policies are adopted, any more than damage to the climate can be undone in short order.

In article <sf67o9$jqm$1@hope.eyrie.org>,
Todd Michel McComb <mccomb@medieval.org> wrote:
>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.

It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
better" approach that is so very racist.

On 8/13/2021 3:00 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
>
> Actually, what we have is an anecdote.  And your distorting my "racism
> used to be worse than it is today" into "there is no racism today" is
> simply dishonest.  Do you really think that the systematic
> under-appraising of property values based on race is anywhere near as
> important a factor in racial income inequality as slavery? Really?  Does
> civil right legislation not make such behavior illegal?  Are there many
> cases of prosecution for under-appraisal based on race?  If there are,
> it ought to be a deterrent.  If not, why not?  Because it's hard to
> prove?  Does this not suggest that investing in improving the education
> of the disadvantaged is a more likely to be a more effective social
> policy than legislating against bigotry?
>

I don't think this is an either/or--do you? I'm pretty sure cases of
prejudice in real estate appraisals and outright racial steering are
under-prosecuted. This is not necessarily because such cases are
difficult to bring, but there are not enough resources being brought to
prosecution of these cases.
There was a case brought several years ago against a real estate
brokerage in Park Slope. Don't remember the specifics, but an agent
posed as a customer. I don't know if anyone served time, but pretty
sure the office was closed down.
Didn't you say you lived in Lindenwood?

On 8/13/2021 2:21 PM, gggg gggg wrote:
> 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
>

Yeah, I heard about this case

On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 2:35:52 AM UTC+2, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
> In article <sf67o9$jqm$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
> Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
> >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.
>
> It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
> better" approach that is so very racist.

Yes. Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called racist.

Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 08:50:34 UTC+2 schreef Herman:
> On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 2:35:52 AM UTC+2, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
> > In article <sf67o9$jqm$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
> > Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
> > >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.
> >
> > It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
> > better" approach that is so very racist.
> Yes. Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called racist.

<g> Never expected you to be a missionary of the Doctrine Of Total Depravity, trying to convince Bob and Frank that they too are "destitute of all good" and "fertile of all evil".

Henk

On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 10:45:37 AM UTC+2, hvt...@xs4all.nl wrote:
> Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 08:50:34 UTC+2 schreef Herman:

> <g> Never expected you to be a missionary of the Doctrine Of Total Depravity, trying to convince Bob and Frank that they too are "destitute of all good" and "fertile of all evil".
>
1 I am not trying to convince anyone of anything.
2 I am not telling anyone they're 'destitute of all good" and it is misleading to put those words between quotation marks.

Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 11:30:09 UTC+2 schreef Herman:
> On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 10:45:37 AM UTC+2, hvt...@xs4all.nl wrote:
> > Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 08:50:34 UTC+2 schreef Herman:
> > <g> Never expected you to be a missionary of the Doctrine Of Total Depravity, trying to convince Bob and Frank that they too are "destitute of all good" and "fertile of all evil".
> >
> 1 I am not trying to convince anyone of anything.
> 2 I am not telling anyone they're 'destitute of all good" and it is misleading to put those words between quotation marks.

1. Thank goodness for that. You would have been part of a centuries-old and rich tradition - but tradition is not everything.
2. The inverted commas indicate that these are quotations from the Doctrine.

Henk

In article <57e75105-5e66-417a-86ad-3eb753138b03n@googlegroups.com>,
Herman <herstx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've
>a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called
>racist.

For years I made a real point to distinguish between a racist comment
or action and a "racist person" -- which is a dubious concept anyway.
And anyone can end up in the former situation, as you say. (That's
part of what systemic racism is.) And then they can think, oh I
made a mistake, and do better. But mostly it seems over the years
that many people increasingly reject the original distinction.
"Being a racist" is a binary & permanent thing for them, and of
course they're in the "not" half. So no doing better. Oh well.

On 8/13/21 11:50 PM, Herman wrote:
> On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 2:35:52 AM UTC+2, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
>> In article <sf67o9$jqm$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
>> Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
>> better" approach that is so very racist.
>
> Yes. Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called racist.
>
Of course, no one who could plausibly make such a claim, which makes
your statement nothing more than trolling.

Bob Harper

On 8/14/21 1:45 AM, HT wrote:
> Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 08:50:34 UTC+2 schreef Herman:
>> On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 2:35:52 AM UTC+2, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
>>> In article <sf67o9$jqm$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
>>> Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
>>> better" approach that is so very racist.
>> Yes. Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called racist.
>
> <g> Never expected you to be a missionary of the Doctrine Of Total Depravity, trying to convince Bob and Frank that they too are "destitute of all good" and "fertile of all evil".
>
> Henk
>
Remember, Henk, I'm a Catholic, not a Calvinist. :)

Bob Harper

Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 19:05:25 UTC+2 schreef Bob Harper:
> On 8/14/21 1:45 AM, HT wrote:
> > Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 08:50:34 UTC+2 schreef Herman:
> >> On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 2:35:52 AM UTC+2, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
> >>> In article <sf67o9$jqm$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
> >>> Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
> >>>> 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.
> >>>
> >>> It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
> >>> better" approach that is so very racist.
> >> Yes. Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called racist.
> >
> > <g> Never expected you to be a missionary of the Doctrine Of Total Depravity, trying to convince Bob and Frank that they too are "destitute of all good" and "fertile of all evil".
> >
> > Henk
> >
> Remember, Henk, I'm a Catholic, not a Calvinist. :)
>
> Bob Harper

I was already under the impression that the confessional would be an impregnable obstacle.

Henk

On 8/13/2021 9:41 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 3:00 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>> Actually, what we have is an anecdote.  And your distorting my "racism used to be worse than it is today" into "there is no racism today" is simply dishonest.  Do you really think that the systematic under-appraising of property values based on race is anywhere near as important a factor in racial income inequality as slavery? Really?  Does civil right legislation not make such behavior illegal?  Are there many cases of prosecution for under-appraisal based on race?  If there are, it ought to be a deterrent.  If not, why not?  Because it's hard to prove?  Does this not suggest that investing in improving the education of the disadvantaged is a more likely to be a more effective social policy than legislating against bigotry?
>>
>
> I don't think this is an either/or--do you?  I'm pretty sure cases of prejudice in real estate appraisals and outright racial steering are under-prosecuted.  This is not necessarily because such cases are difficult to bring, but there are not enough resources being brought to prosecution of these cases.
> There was a case brought several years ago against a real estate brokerage in Park Slope.  Don't remember the specifics, but an agent posed as a customer.  I don't know if anyone served time, but pretty sure the office was closed down.
> Didn't you say you lived in Lindenwood?

Never heard of it.

On 8/14/2021 2:50 AM, Herman wrote:
> On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 2:35:52 AM UTC+2, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
>> In article <sf67o9$jqm$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
>> Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
>> better" approach that is so very racist.
>
> Yes. Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called racist.
>

Not to mention the people who call others racist (under the guise of "defending racism") yet can not produce any example of then having done so. Nor do they apologize for the accusation.

On 8/14/21 11:57 AM, HT wrote:
> Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 19:05:25 UTC+2 schreef Bob Harper:
>> On 8/14/21 1:45 AM, HT wrote:
>>> Op zaterdag 14 augustus 2021 om 08:50:34 UTC+2 schreef Herman:
>>>> On Saturday, August 14, 2021 at 2:35:52 AM UTC+2, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
>>>>> In article <sf67o9$jqm$1...@hope.eyrie.org>,
>>>>> Todd Michel McComb <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the implied expertise that really offends me. The "we know
>>>>> better" approach that is so very racist.
>>>> Yes. Also, the absolute certainty with which some people claim they've a hundred procent never done anything that could remotely called racist.
>>>
>>> <g> Never expected you to be a missionary of the Doctrine Of Total Depravity, trying to convince Bob and Frank that they too are "destitute of all good" and "fertile of all evil".
>>>
>>> Henk
>>>
>> Remember, Henk, I'm a Catholic, not a Calvinist. :)
>>
>> Bob Harper
>
> I was already under the impression that the confessional would be an impregnable obstacle.
>
> Henk
>
??

Bob Harper