Baltimore

[ShockBand]

Thanks, pinstripers. The punks that riot, regardless of color, are criminals in my book. The problem is the riots gain all the traction in the media and people's conversation, and it overshadows the fact that there are real, deep, serious issues in minority communities that we need to keep working to address. But the media knows that bad news gets better ratings and thus sells better, and certain things make for better sound bites and short video clips, so that is what we mostly get fed. And being a WASP male, I have no frame of reference for understanding cultural and institutionalized prejudice, but I need to be as mindful about it as I can if I am to at least try and do right towards all my neighbors.

[shocka khan]

Thanks, pinstripers. The punks that riot, regardless of color, are criminals in my book. The problem is the riots gain all the traction in the media and people's conversation, and it overshadows the fact that there are real, deep, serious issues in minority communities that we need to keep working to address. But the media knows that bad news gets better ratings and thus sells better, and certain things make for better sound bites and short video clips, so that is what we mostly get fed. And being a WASP male, I have no frame of reference for understanding cultural and institutionalized prejudice, but I need to be as mindful about it as I can if I am to at least try and do right towards all my neighbors.

Does that include all the hillbillies from Kentucky raising hell in Indy last month (just had to do that one for a laugh!).

[ShockBand]

Does that include all the hillbillies from Kentucky raising hell in Indy last month (just had to do that one for a laugh!).

Hill folk are, shall we say, unique. I actually have seen a few in Arkansas in stores when traveling, and realized that some of that really isn't just myth. I'm sure the same is true in Appalachia. (And yes, I include this as a dig at the darlings from UK)

[shocka khan]

Getting the thread back on track, I think what's happening in Baltimore is horrible, but it is more a reflection of our world today. We have outsourced jobs (and opportunity) and created income inequities. The middle class is getting smaller, and those of us left are getting squeezed harder every year.

The result is somewhat akin to what happened during the French Revolution when someone told Marie Antoinette the peasants were hungry and her response was 'let them eat cake'.

So will our political and corporate leadership tell the rest of us to go eat cake or will they start addressing structural issues that appear to be festering because we spend more time fighting over social issues and less time fighting over pocketbook issues.

Note that this includes and is not limited to ANY political party.

[SHOCKvalue]

@ShockBand:

Riots bring media coverage because they threaten life and property. It is not a terrifically hard concept to wrap one's mind around.

Things like fatherless households, high teenage pregnancy, low parental engagement in education, high levels of crime leading directly to high levels of incarcerations, generally anti-social behavior, high levels of unemployment, and further such, are all fairly established issues, are they not? They're essentially not news; they're in fact not news by its very definition. What are the media outlets to say exactly? What has evoloved on these issues that makes them non-stagnant?

Further these are issues of socio-economics, class, and culture, and have little to do with race. Have you driven through Oaklawn recently (predominantly white), Plainview (predominantly asian), or North Arkansas St (predominantly hispanic)? Hard to differentiate the forces impacting those communities from those impacting say the community surrounding WSU (predominantly black).

As for the "WASP" term, MANY people find that to be directly analogous to the racist and disparaging labels used for other races. I assume that since you probably don't use those words, that perhaps you might also want to strike "WASP" from your vocabulary as a presumably educated and cultured individual. Also, unless you are independently wealthy, then you - as a public school educator - do not even meet that classic context of the term in the first place. It's okay; I don't either.

Finally, you saying that since you are white (I will choose not to use your pejorative acronym again) you have "no frame of reference for understanding cultural and institutionalized prejudice" is so ridiculously inane and obtuse that I shouldn't even have to point it out. If you really believe that statement is effectual for people of white skin then I am terrified that you are allowed to shape young minds in the context of your employment.

[ShockBand]

I'm sorry you feel terrified of me, SHOCKvalue. To be honest, this is why I usually shy away from message board debates, because you and I don't know each other personally, and very often knowing someone personally helps frame debates. You stated a strong opinion of me based on this discussion, but I haven't about you, because the moment I jump to a conclusion about someone for whom I only know online, I find that perception often has a lot of holes due to nuances that are missed.

My "frame of reference" comment is meant to say I have not experienced the type of prejudice that many minorities experience, so I can't fully honestly say "I understand." I can only guess what it must be like. I certainly hope I have never been prejudiced towards others, as character matters most to me. But I'm not perfect, I probably have done something wrong.

And I do agree the issues really at the core are socio-economic.

I'm OK with NOT discussing further, as I don't always express myself well online. Perhaps I should have followed my usual of staying away from hot button topics in a format that I don't always communicate in the best manner.

[jdshock]

Further these are issues of socio-economics, class, and culture, and have little to do with race. Have you driven through Oaklawn recently (predominantly white), Plainview (predominantly asian), or North Arkansas St (predominantly hispanic)? Hard to differentiate the forces impacting those communities from those impacting say the community surrounding WSU (predominantly black).

It's naive to think race doesn't play a part. All of those categories have privilege and disprivilege associated with certain parts of them. Socio-economic status, race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, etc all have privileged "options" and unprivileged ones. Just because you can point to one example of a group of white people that are living in poverty, does not mean that there is no privilege that comes from being white. Appalachian poverty is incredibly bad and primarily white. Inner-city poverty is incredibly bad and primarily non-white. Different categories and options play out differently with different privilege in different situations. A person who is impoverished may experience a great deal of harm. That does not mean that they have the "frame of reference" to know what it is like to be stereotyped in an airport security line.

White people just factually don't have the frame of reference to understand institutionalized prejudice against non-white people. Middle-class and wealthy individuals do not have the frame of reference for understanding that prejudice against lower-income individuals.

[shocka khan]

White people just factually don't have the frame of reference to understand institutionalized prejudice against non-white people. Middle-class and wealthy individuals do not have the frame of reference for understanding that prejudice against lower-income individuals.

I definitely think that your comment is narrow-minded. Couples who are mixed-race definitely develop a frame of reference and understanding of institutional prejudice. Not from what they learned growing up, but more from what they learn as a result of being in a mixed-race relationship.

Your second comment totally overlooks people who may have been poor at one time but are now wealthy or middle class. Some of the most successful people I know started out poor (an individual who sold her in-home nursing company she built for several million dollars who had to sleep in her car while attending TAMU because she couldn't afford a dorm, for instance). In fact, I think that many of these people are more innovative and creative than those of us who had the middle-class suburbia upbringing. They had to fight much harder and be much more determined to overcome their circumstances.

There are exceptions to every rule. Especially in today's world.

[RoyalShock]

I would like to point out that things didn't get violent until Jeff Samardzija and Chris Sale showed up in Baltimore.

[Rlh04d]

Getting the thread back on track, I think what's happening in Baltimore is horrible, but it is more a reflection of our world today. We have outsourced jobs (and opportunity) and created income inequities. The middle class is getting smaller, and those of us left are getting squeezed harder every year.

The result is somewhat akin to what happened during the French Revolution when someone told Marie Antoinette the peasants were hungry and her response was 'let them eat cake'.

So will our political and corporate leadership tell the rest of us to go eat cake or will they start addressing structural issues that appear to be festering because we spend more time fighting over social issues and less time fighting over pocketbook issues.

Note that this includes and is not limited to ANY political party.

I agree with this, to a large degree. Ultimately the people that are rioting are doing so because they're disenfranchised in many ways: they're uneducated, poor, marginalized, etc. That doesn't have necessarily have anything to do with race, although poor racial relations with police in urban areas is definitely a major contributing factor; it's an urban population problem, where schools are often terrible, and economic stagnation and decline is constant. They're people that have been left behind, and they're angry about it.

Many people are struggling these days; it takes more education than ever to be economically competitive, our education system is seriously flawed, the gap between the rich and poor is continuously growing, etc., etc. We're leaving too many people behind, and we don't have to leave them behind. Our government can do something about it, and isn't. And from top to bottom, I think it HAS to begin with an improved education system across the board. There is no excuse for the richest country in the world to have such a poor education system.

On the other end of things, some people just like to destroy things, and nothing is going to change that. Mob mentality doesn't know racial, education, or economic bounds. You get people together in large groups and they often lose their minds. You see it happen constantly even with college students following a sports event, like the Ohio State riots recently or the Penn State riots after the JoePa decision. People devolve to their base instincts when in a group. The protection of the mob seems to absolve people of the threat of prosecution, and the bounds of civilization fall apart pretty quickly without the threat of punishment.

I had a good chat with a woman from western Asia today ... we were talking about how she had been watching the riots for hours last night and couldn't look away. I figured she'd express the same opinion everyone else does: how horrible it is, what anarchy, etc., etc., etc. Instead what she said was how proud the riot made her to be an American, and how happy she was with the decision to immigrate years ago. She told me about massacres she'd seen in her home country from peaceful protests, and the response by police, local politicians, local mothers and fathers, etc. brought her to tears in happiness. This is a woman who grew up in the Soviet Union; she's seen devastation. It was a pretty sobering chat.

It's a good idea to keep things in context. You can look at what's happening in Baltimore as a loss of control. I look at what's happening in Baltimore as a need for a reinvestment in education and socioeconomic development. I see our definition of what's a "terribly violent protest" as being redefined to something that really isn't all that bad; a few injured police officers and burned buildings, but overall little major damage, and no deaths. I see our political and police response far more mature and peaceful than in the past. Compare these riots to riots of the past, where serious injuries and deaths were regular occurrences, police battered and murdered peaceful protesters, etc., etc., etc. We've come a long way. These riots aren't particularly bad; we've just come so far that our definition of a bad riot has changed.

[MoValley John]

From everything I can gather about the Ferguson shooting, It was completely justified. Two other killings were not. This one in South Carolina, http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/07/us/sou...der/index.html

and the Freddie Gray killing in Baltimore. I don't think the cop was being a racist in the South Carolina shooting, I think he was pissed and lazy. Instead of chasing he guy after the taser didn't stop him, he just pulled out his gun and shot him- several times.

The Freddie Gray killing in Baltimore was just brutality. As many know, my wife is a trauma nurse. She and I, along with several other members of her dept. talked about this at dinner. These are right wing, law and order doctors and nurses, mind you, and the consensus from these people that work trauma on a daily basis is that you simply don't end up with these injuries simply from evading and resisting. Keep in mind that Freddie Gray was tazed and down. He subsequently had his neck and trachea crushed. He suffered other fractures as well.

I understand that if he and the guy in South Carolina didn't run, they would probably still be alive today. Police work is difficult and thankless, but those officers signed up for the job and do not have the right, nor the authority to kill without justification. I am disturbed by the riots, I am disgusted by them. That said, I just wonder, with the police knowing that they are under increased scrutiny, they would shoot a guy for fleeing or crush another guys neck. There is no reason for rioting and looting, but my God, what the cops are doing is just sickening.

On an aside, an unarmed white guy was shot and killed in Omaha about a month or so ago. No riots, no outrage. What was interesting is the district attorney, based on the grand jury investigation, said that there simply wasn't enough evidence to charge the cop. The cop stayed on the force until immediately following the ensuing internal investigation, he resigned. This was the second fatal shooting tat this cop was involved in. Most cops in Omaha never even draw their weapon, this guy has killed two people. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...0MK2Q920150324

[Rlh04d]

For anyone interested, I'd really recommend Googling Baltimore City Councilman Nick Mosby. He's had several very impressive interviews during the riots that I wholeheartedly agree with. He was also out on the streets during the riot, organizing adult males in his district to go with him, speak to the people on the street, and police the neighborhood, while asking police to avoid the area. The police left the area to him and his constituents and they had no issues in his area. Here's a few:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32r1EhPRlDI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWs2jTi16iI

There's a lot of anger in this country and distrust of police, and refusing to make any effort to understand why is a poor decision. Anger has causes. Understanding the cause is what enables people in power to respond to it and fix the problem.

And I don't mean that as brushing over anything that's happening. A friend of mine from the local FSU Alumni Association that I watch every FSU football game with is a Baltimore police officer who works on the west side. He took a bottle to his face and later a brick to his back/shoulder area along with another cop on Saturday night, and is resting up in a local hospital.

[Rlh04d]

On an aside, an unarmed white guy was shot and killed in Omaha about a month or so ago. No riots, no outrage. What was interesting is the district attorney, based on the grand jury investigation, said that there simply wasn't enough evidence to charge the cop. The cop stayed on the force until immediately following the ensuing internal investigation, he resigned. This was the second fatal shooting tat this cop was involved in. Most cops in Omaha never even draw their weapon, this guy has killed two people. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...0MK2Q920150324

I think the discussion about police brutality towards minorities is just a portion of the problem. There's a real issue with the police in general in this country: poor training, poor pay, an institutionalized system of protection, etc., etc. There are too many bad cops that get protected just because they ARE cops. And protecting those bad cops makes the good cops look worse, and puts them in danger when people finally get angry.

IMO, every cop in this country needs a camera on them, to protect the good cops and catch the bad ones. They need to be trained better, they need to be paid better, and the bad cops need to be prosecuted swiftly and decisively.

[pinstripers]

Were the police that beat up this career criminal black or white? Or does it matter?

[shockmonster]

The problem with the incident in Baltimore and some other places that involved police brutality of black people that are claimed as racism is that there are a lot of incidents where brutality happens on whites that aren't called racism. Racism is difficult to prove just as proving that the Clintons are involved in corruption with foreign governments without the smoking gun (e-mails that Hillary erased). Here is another incident that doesn't fit the police brutality/racism narrative because it is a white person being beaten.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPvTTmhyB_w