Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

And now, I'm picturing Adder walking into a bar somewhere and saying "Hi! I'm here to meet black people!"

AUTSR (always use the seinfeld reference)

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Look, I'm not stupid. I understand that white people are never going to give up anything tangible. I realize that change will only come over generations and generations of painfully slow improvement. And obviously there has been progress. I think part of that article's point is that the good intentions we've seen from so many white people over Brown and Ferguson, etc. don't mean much when the outcome is exactly the same for black people as it has always been. And the author was expressing her frustration because of that.

TM

People aren't going to give up anything tangible unless they are forced to do so or unless it benefits them in some way. 95% of people are interested only in taking care of their families and personal well-being (whether they admit that or not). I can't even really fault that attitude because in it's not in a human's DNA to give a damn about, for example, whether black people have a fair fight in life. Most people just don't care and aren't wired to care. What they care about is feeding and housing their families - the same thing humans and most other animals have cared about since the beginning of time. I wish we weren't wired that way - but we are. I wish this board represented the mindset of the country, but in reality most Americans (and most people) collectively aren't particularly interested in the well-being of non-family/non-friends. I guess my point is that you're right: it's going to take generations for the field to level. It will happen, but it's going to take a while.

As you can see, I don't have a lot of faith in humans to ever do the right thing. At least in the short term.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I confess to not having very many black friends. One imaginary one on the internet. One of the guys from our beer club that I don't know that well. A number of facebook friends, primarily former colleagues or friends-of-friends.

The wife has encouraged me to try to become friends with a black female lawyer I've just started to work with at the office, and has suggested inviting her and her husband to things. Maybe I should do that. But I feel a little awkward because (1) I'm rather a bit older than her, (2) we've just started working on stuff, and (3) the black lady is pretty hot (and we all know I have awkward feelings about hot people).

You don't seek out to make black friends, or Asian friends, or female friends, or gay friends, or any other category of friends. You either make them as you would any other friend, or you don't.

It is bizarre to actively solicit a person's friendship based on background. If you hit it off with this woman, she's a friend. If not, she's an acquaintance.

I don't have enough hours in the day to give a shit about someone's race, ethnicity, sexual preference, or any other differentiating factor beyond a person's control. Most people are such annoying, irritating, or insipid fucks it's damn hard to find a decent person to have dinner with these days. I say if you find one you like who's shining day glo green, trans-sexual, and a fundamentalist Zoroastrian, it's a win. Go with it. If not, maintain an open mind and keep looking.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

People aren't going to give up anything tangible unless they are forced to do so or unless it benefits them in some way. 95% of people are interested only in taking care of their families and personal well-being (whether they admit that or not). I can't even really fault that attitude because in it's not in a human's DNA to give a damn about, for example, whether black people have a fair fight in life. Most people just don't care and aren't wired to care. What they care about is feeding and housing their families - the same thing humans and most other animals have cared about since the beginning of time. I wish we weren't wired that way - but we are. I wish this board represented the mindset of the country, but in reality most Americans (and most people) collectively aren't particularly interested in the well-being of non-family/non-friends. I guess my point is that you're right: it's going to take generations for the field to level. It will happen, but it's going to take a while.

As you can see, I don't have a lot of faith in humans to ever do the right thing. At least in the short term.

I see a lot changing. My kids, for instance, don't even identify the race of people they are describing. My daughter had a black roommate in college and I didn't know the girl's race until we went down for her graduation. My son's date to a HS dance was black. Again, I had no idea until I opened the front door one day and she was standing there.

Even the kids of a few people I know that are definitely racist and not particularly circumspect about it tend to be more color-blind. I think that color-blindness will lead us to a more level playing field.

As a hardcore 5%er, I think our ranks are gathering.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

And now, I'm picturing Adder walking into a bar somewhere and saying "Hi! I'm here to meet black people!"

In fairness, it's also painful to see people refuse to discuss the race aspect of things. I was shooting the shit with a black guy in line at a store the other night. Don't know him, just happened to get in an extended conversation. My job came up, and he asked if the criminal justice system was as fucked up as it appeared in the media. Struck me odd from a black guy, whom I assumed had seen its racist tendencies up close. But he asked a question, so I answered: "It's totally set up to screw poor people, and particularly poor minorities." For reasons I'll never understand, most whites will never say shit like this out loud, even to black friends. It's like talking about money, or sex - they assume it's too ugly for discussion. That's just fucking stupid. The guy's black, he asks a question about a racial incident. Cut the politeness shtick and answer the question.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I see a lot changing. My kids, for instance, don't even identify the race of people they are describing. My daughter had a black roommate in college and I didn't know the girl's race until we went down for her graduation. My son's date to a HS dance was black. Again, I had no idea until I opened the front door one day and she was standing there.

Even the kids of a few people I know that are definitely racist and not particularly circumspect about it tend to be more color-blind. I think that color-blindness will lead us to a more level playing field.

As a hardcore 5%er, I think our ranks are gathering.

I agree. It's happening. Slowly and organically - I see it too with my kids.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I don't have enough hours in the day to give a shit about someone's race, ethnicity, sexual preference, or any other differentiating factor beyond a person's control.

Like Sebastian, I too do not see race or ethnicity. Not because, like Sebastian, I am too busy to be distracted by these trivial details. I am actually unable to distinguish different races and ethnicities. I am post-racial.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I am only back because T had nothing to do with my leaving, and I respect him, and grow from honest conversation on this issue. I am still gone other than this limited exception.

I can't judge you one way or the other for leaving. I've left this board many a time. But it's been more for my sanity than anything else. And I'm not sure why the last exchange you had made you so angry, but I haven't been privvy to whatever has been building up here while I was on pb-hiatus. But give yourself a break and come back when the anger has subsided a bit. I like to hear different perspectives as long as it's not pure small-minded hatred. And I think there is very little of that (if any) over here these days.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I guess I wonder what you mean by "whites giving stuff up?" [edit- Re-reading I think you mean more than just accepting we are advantaged, but then behaving based upon the knowledge?]

I posted about this later in the string.

I think affirmative action is the perfect example. Very few people understand that it is a remedial program meant to fix the effects of racial discrimination in hiring and admissions, etc. They think of it as free gifts to black people at the expense of some deserving white person who never actively participated in discrimination. They simple cannot see or do not want to see that the effects of hundreds of years of oppression have put white people in a significant position of power and privilege, and black people in the position of perpetual recovery. Their focus is so hyper-focused and narrow that they can block out all of the other opportunity that their privilege confers and throw a fit over the one thing they didn't get that they so richly "deserve" (which is based on a system--high school grading schemes, standardized exams, the whole educational system up until that point--that is designed to reward those who are privileged and punish those who are not).

When I say white people need to give something up I mean that that attitude where they believe they deserve something based on the system they fucking created to reward themselves should be the first thing to go. Once that is gone, the mental approach where you believe you're giving something up in order to try to create a level playing field goes next. And then, when a black person gets a promotion in a company in which they are the only black person anywhere near the C-suite that a white person didn't, that white person may not view it as them having lost something that should have been theirs.

Whenever I am involved in hiring and I have to fight for someone whose grades may be a little lower than the kid who went from great school to great school, I try to provide some context larger than the firm's typical myopic, grades-only approach. This kid pulled herself out of fucking Gary, Indiana, went to a not-so-great undergrad, and managed to get into and succeed at a top 30 law school. Do you know how motivated this person is compared to the candidate you want who has a gpa 2 points higher? Do you realize how much catching up she had to do based on the substandard education she got at her public schools? Do you understand the level of loyalty and gratitude she will have for the firm that takes a chance on her? If you take this other kid he'll be gone the first time you don't match Simpson's bonus structure because he just knows he deserves it. I've had this conversation time and time again.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

My old biggest client has a black GC. He flat out looks for black candidates to fill any spots he has.

Good for him. When I was a paralegal I had a senior associate who put me on all his stuff. He was the son of a baker who put himself through undergrad and law school and who understood who I was. I point this out because he is a white guy, but he gets it. He understands. Usually, the most frequent and passionate pushback I get is from white guys like him who didn't have the advantages of wealth, but who have fought hard for what they have. He knows that when the white partners at the white shoe firm at which we worked look at him, they see a fighter who pulled himself up by the bootstraps. When those same white people look at the black associate (singular) he had working for him back then, they saw something completely different. I've been loyal to that guy for 20 years.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I think I have used what power i have, although the area I am in is so rarified I don't have as much opportunity. GC had to fill a patent counsel position; he looked for a year before giving up on a black candidate*. Still I do use what I can where i can. Although in retrospect over the years there were people i should have helped that I didn't.

It's a huge problem. Firms can't wait to say "There just aren't enough qualified black candidates." I think people have been trying to change this by investing in kids very early on and trying to lead them towards law school because the fix isn't to hire as many black law students who make law review as you can. The fix is to go to junior high schools and high schools and talk to kids and institute programs so that they know a future in fields of law they've never, ever been exposed to, exist.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

The thing that troubles me is regardless of all the people who might pull up kids, lots can't be pulled up. Detroit schools have some silly big drop out rate. How do you fix a 30/40 % rate of kids w/o HS degrees? My kids are scrambling with college degrees. No HS diploma is not a good base for em's future. I do not know how to correct this, and some of those kids will certainly get to crime, and ..... I don't know.

Yeah. This is why I go on rants about private schools. White flight combined with the emergence of private schooling and educational district-gerrymandering have created huge swaths of cities that have just been outright neglected.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

And now, I'm picturing Adder walking into a bar somewhere and saying "Hi! I'm here to meet black people!"

Why do you think I asked him to post about it?

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

This country is constantly in denial about racism or the effects of racism. Black people have to prove, with a smoking gun, that our treatment is the product of racism. We are consistently forced to give up the historical context we know to be true because it's possible that any one instance may not be the result of racism. But that's applied everywhere to everything, from the job Loquanda missed out on because of her name to the mortgage rate that's too high because the apartment is located in a black neighborhood (all other things being equal) to whether or not an officer shot a 12 year old kid because he has an internalized fear of black people.

Agreed, but I have a problem with those examples. And I guess it comes down to a question of whether risk minimization is true racism. The decision to lend is a risk analysis. If black neighborhoods tend to be poor neighborhoods, and poor ones have higher default rates, is a lender racist for charging a higher rate? Perhaps the outcome is racist, but the racist intent is absent. If an HR manager uses data suggesting people with certain black sounding names tend to be less advantageous hires, is that really racist, or is that engaging in cold, amoral risk analysis? I'm not suggesting an answer one way or another, but big data is making this already complicated question a whole more so.

Look, I'm not stupid. I understand that white people are never going to give up anything tangible.

This is where I become a little confused. I don't see what whites are giving up in becoming less racist. White people had an advantage being born white. Nobody's asked us to concede anything. We've been asked not to hold other people down. Or get behind police who murder them. But economically, it's not a zero sum game. The more black people advance, the more the economy grows, the more everyone benefits over the long term. Am I missing something here?

I realize that change will only come over generations and generations of painfully slow improvement. And obviously there has been progress. I think part of that article's point is that the good intentions we've seen from so many white people over Brown and Ferguson, etc. don't mean much when the outcome is exactly the same for black people as it has always been. And the author was expressing her frustration because of that.

Nothing has more empty calories than white guilt and its gaudy public expressions of sympathies. But keep in mind - this is America, where no one has an attention span much beyond that of your average lab rat. In regard to almost everything problematic, we're all about awareness, and outcry. But when it comes down to the tough work of actually fixing the problem, we've already moved on to the next tragedy over which we can publicly display our dismay.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

People aren't going to give up anything tangible unless they are forced to do so or unless it benefits them in some way. 95% of people are interested only in taking care of their families and personal well-being (whether they admit that or not). I can't even really fault that attitude because in it's not in a human's DNA to give a damn about, for example, whether black people have a fair fight in life. Most people just don't care and aren't wired to care. What they care about is feeding and housing their families - the same thing humans and most other animals have cared about since the beginning of time. I wish we weren't wired that way - but we are. I wish this board represented the mindset of the country, but in reality most Americans (and most people) collectively aren't particularly interested in the well-being of non-family/non-friends. I guess my point is that you're right: it's going to take generations for the field to level. It will happen, but it's going to take a while.

As you can see, I don't have a lot of faith in humans to ever do the right thing. At least in the short term.

I'm with you. Although, I will say this: Poor people (and most of my experience with poor people revolves around poor people of color) give shit up to other poor people all the time. The attitudes I see in poor neighborhoods do not exist in wealthy ones. Wealthy neighborhoods are designed to not only keep people out, but to isolate families with fences and huge lots and private clubs, within. I know plenty of poor people and they look out for each other. I know plenty of well-off people and sure, they give to charities, but if the family down the street is struggling it's just a shame.

I'm sure you've seen those videos where a guy, dressed normally, goes out and asks people if he can have some of their food because he's hungry and gets rejected by people with money again and again, but asks a homeless man if he can have some of his pizza because he is really hungry and is immediately given a share. Or the video of the homeless man who is handed a winning lottery ticket (for like a few hundred bucks) who wants to share it with the guy who set it up as an experiment. Whether it's something like that or the study that showed that it's the older, poor, black women who are x-times more likely to give up their seat to a pregnant woman on public transportation, there's just a different attitude that comes from having nothing and not believing you deserve a ton of shit.

I think it's easy to say that we focus on our families because it's the acceptable way of saying, I don't give a fuck about other people. But, like you said, we really should recognize that that's what we're saying. If your attitude is, "I want to give my child every advantage in life," okay. But no one should pretend that there isn't a flip side to that coin.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You don't seek out to make black friends, or Asian friends, or female friends, or gay friends, or any other category of friends. You either make them as you would any other friend, or you don't.

If one has designed one's life, consciously or not, in such a way that one will never come across a minority who is not in a service position, then maybe one should rethink one's approach.

TM

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Agreed, but I have a problem with those examples. And I guess it comes down to a question of whether risk minimization is true racism. The decision to lend is a risk analysis. If black neighborhoods tend to be poor neighborhoods, and poor ones have higher default rates, is a lender racist for charging a higher rate? Perhaps the outcome is racist, but the racist intent is absent. If an HR manager uses data suggesting people with certain black sounding names tend to be less advantageous hires, is that really racist, or is that engaging in cold, amoral risk analysis? I'm not suggesting an answer one way or another, but big data is making this already complicated question a whole more so.

I call bullshit. The black neighborhoods tend to be a greater risk, because they are populated by poor black people. That's what you're saying, and that ain't pure economics.

What's more, even if it's a bigger risk than lending to the nice white folks who are buying a second home in Door County, so what? Take the risk. Give people a chance. Chase makes enough money that it can afford to lend millions more than it does to minorities and people in lower income brackets, wind up eating every single one of those loans, and they would do better than one bad credit default swap. Which is funny, because credit default swaps are based on the assumption that there will be a decent number of failures by large corporations run and owned by rich white people.

As for the HR guy, I'd fire em just for looking for that kind of data. So maybe the black kid has a higher learning curve. Put in more effort, take more time. Make it better. Because let's face it, we both know what the underlying cause of that performance disparity is, and it isn't who worked harder in school.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Agreed, but I have a problem with those examples. And I guess it comes down to a question of whether risk minimization is true racism. The decision to lend is a risk analysis. If black neighborhoods tend to be poor neighborhoods, and poor ones have higher default rates, is a lender racist for charging a higher rate? Perhaps the outcome is racist, but the racist intent is absent. If an HR manager uses data suggesting people with certain black sounding names tend to be less advantageous hires, is that really racist, or is that engaging in cold, amoral risk analysis? I'm not suggesting an answer one way or another, but big data is making this already complicated question a whole more so.

Fucking stop it. Maybe you selectively chose to ignore the words "everything else being equal?" Your push back on the mortgage example is ridiculous. If I earn x dollars a year and have x assets and you earn the same and have the same and we both want a house that is worth exactly the same amount, and the only difference between the two of us is the racial make-up of the neighborhood in which we live, the fact that you have a lower interest than I, is fucking racist. And it's institutional. Maybe they default with more frequency because their rates are significantly fucking higher for bullshit reasons. Read the studies about redlining. Hell, read the definition.

Your second example is even more stupid. What fucking data are you talking about that suggests people with black sounding names tend to be less advantageous hires? What a ridiculous thing to say. Amoral risk analysis. Suck a dick.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

This is where I become a little confused. I don't see what whites are giving up in becoming less racist. White people had an advantage being born white. Nobody's asked us to concede anything. We've been asked not to hold other people down. Or get behind police who murder them. But economically, it's not a zero sum game. The more black people advance, the more the economy grows, the more everyone benefits over the long term. Am I missing something here?

You're looking at it from a macro level instead of the personal level that people use to view this stuff. I've already written a bunch about this, so I'll avoid repeating myself.

TM

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

But keep in mind - this is America, where no one has an attention span much beyond that of your average lab rat. In regard to almost everything problematic, we're all about awareness, and outcry. But when it comes down to the tough work of actually fixing the problem, we've already moved on to the next tragedy over which we can publicly display our dismay.

I think this is partly what the woman in the article was saying.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Like Sebastian, I too do not see race or ethnicity. Not because, like Sebastian, I am too busy to be distracted by these trivial details. I am actually unable to distinguish different races and ethnicities. I am post-racial.

Seriously, I am not there yet, but attempting. I figure if I can shame myself enough by saying in my head, "It's irrational to consider race or ethnicity" enough, I might get there someday.

But then I wind up litigating against people who fit stereotypes, and their cultural ticks become relevant for purposes of assessing how they'll behave in the case, and let perceptions of how others of their culture might play the game inform how I behave. Some folks do fit the stereotypes, and it'd be malpractice not to expect certain things from them.