CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
American Blacks on average commit more crime (Source 1), and these numbers come from the proportion of offenders identified by victims as black (so it can't be due to police racism). To quote my source: "The proportion of black suspects arrested by the police tends to match closely the proportion of offenders identified as black by victims in the National Crime Victimization Survey." As such, any argument that police arrest more blacks because of racism falls on it's face.
Note, I believe that the reason that black people commit more crime on average than other races is because of poverty, single parenthood and culture, not due to an inherent racial drive towards crime.
Oh it definitely goes both ways, and there are many mediating factors too. It's all deeply inter-related in a downward spiral. For example, diet impacts massively on intelligence which impacts on poverty which impacts on diet again. Lower intelligence is related to more criminality and poverty simultaneously and both crime and poverty are related to single parenthood which is related back to poverty and crime (for the child) etc. I think all the above are related to each other in both directions and through co-variables too, you?
The relationship among these correlates is definitely jumbled, but I think I can unpack a small bit of it.
Single parenthood is caused primarily by culture. Single parenthood in turn contributes to a wide range of societal issues. Fatherlessness is the single greatest correlate of poverty. The large majority of criminals grew up fatherless. Fatherlessness is associated with a host of mental health and other issues as well.
The correlation between crime and poverty alone is much easier to explain than many realize. Most poor people are not criminals, but most criminals are poor. That’s because crime makes the vast majority of criminals poor, especially in the long run. Getting caught is expensive. Having a record is too. Thus, if you are a criminal there is a very very high probability that you are poor, and if you are poor, there are increased odds of criminality.
The causal arrow sometimes appears to go from poverty to crime as well, but I contend that this is only an appearance. Being poor very very rarely pushes people necessarily to crime. Rather, the prevalence of criminals among the poor will propagate culture of criminality. Young people growing up in poverty are highly susceptible to adopting such negative cultures. Thus, it is not their poverty, but their culture which lead to criminality.
However, strong family structures can overcome the criminal culture which may be prevalent in a given families neighborhood. That kind of structure typically requires more than just a mother.
Again, culture lies at the root of a complex situation.
Do you include the lack of incentive to not be a single parent (through benefits) in culture? I think that's a big factor.
The large majority of criminals grew up fatherless. Fatherlessness is associated with a host of mental health and other issues as well.
I agree and I'd add that genetic factors are likely a co-variable here too. Criminals and the mentally ill are more likely to not raise their children and criminality and mental illness are in part genetically determined.
...Thus, it is not their poverty, but their culture which lead to criminality.
I agree mostly, however this misses the link between low IQ and poverty and low IQ and criminality. If you're low IQ you're more likely to believe you can get away with crime and also you have very few options to attain wealth and status. Thus crime seems to them as a risky option to get wealth (and thereby gain status) to lower IQ people. Also low IQ is related back to diet which is related back to poverty.
culture lies at the root of a complex situation.
I agree that it's a major piece of the puzzle but I'm not sure about the root cause. In poor neighborhoods vicarious learning takes place. When the people similar to you that are rich and have status (in the area) are all criminals it creates the perception that criminality is how people like you can attain status and money. So part of why the culture emerged in the first place would be this phenomenon of vicarious learning. If we do identify the primary concern as culture, though, what can be done to change it?
Do you include the lack of incentive to not be a single parent (through benefits) in culture? I think that's a big factor.
Incentives and disincentives shape behaviors and cultures. Institutions result from culture and incentives often result from institutions. So it is connected in a bit of a feedback loop.
I agree mostly, however this misses the link between low IQ and poverty and low IQ and criminality.
It’s certainly a factor, and we could go down this rabbit hole forever. But culture appears to have an impact on the genetic factors related to IQ in a matter of a few generations; too quick to be an evolutionary product. We don’t understand enough about genetics yet to know the extent to which environmental factors could affect them in the relative short term.
If you're low IQ you're more likely to believe you can get away with crime and also you have very few options to attain wealth and status.
True. On the other hand, a person raised with good principles is more likely to adhere to them, regardless of IQ.
So part of why the culture emerged in the first place would be this phenomenon of vicarious learning.
Seems to me that vicarious learning is fundamental to culture.
If we do identify the primary concern as culture, though, what can be done to change it?
That’s the tough but to crack. You can’t change someone else’s culture for them. They have to adopt a change themselves, one individual at a time.
Nothin huh? I guess we’ll never know what they need to train for.
Hello A:
Yeah, I missed it..
For the most part, I don't believe individual cops are racist..
I do believe, however, that racism is endemic in most police departments.. That can be corrected with training.. Will it change and/or effect individual cops? No, but systemic racism is NOT about individuals.. It's about the department..
Seems to me, that even an absolutely NON racist cop would approach a black driver differently than a white one.. Especially, if it was late at night, in a white neighborhood, and a young black man driving with a few of his friends..
If he DOES do that, is it racist, or is it common sense? Or is it racism disguised as common sense?? Do you think he was TRAINED to respond that way??? I'll bet NOT. So, he/the department CAN be trained NOT to do it.
Not really. You said most cops aren’t racist but that most departments are. Then you gave an example, not of systemic racism, but possibly individual bias. You even included factors that go beyond race that would make it reasonable for a cop to act different, ie the people in the car seem to not be from there, there is more than one, and it is late at night. Those are all good reasons for an officer to act differently.
I expect you gave an individual example, while saying that most individual cops aren’t racist, because it is notoriously difficult (most often impossible) to articulate an instance of systemic racism in police departments (or most places). Varying rates of crime and arrests aren’t indicative of racism, though they are often cited as evidence.
Seems to me, that even an absolutely NON racist cop would approach a black driver differently than a white one.. Especially, if it was late at night, in a white neighborhood, and a young black man driving with a few of his friends..
Either way you want it Con. Pick any group. It's a Native reservation. What's that white guy doing here? Must be up to no good.
Black neighborhood. What's that white guy doing here? Must be up to no good.
Muslim neighborhood. What's a Jew doing here? Must be up to no good.
White neighborhood. What's that black guy doing here? Must be up to no good.
And more times than not, they'd be dead right. And if the black guy was Andre the neighbor, no one would flinch. If the white guy was Joey the white guy raised in that black neighborhood, no one would flinch. But it's not Andre. It's not Joey. It's an opposite raced guy that no one has ever seen before, and his skin color just makes it even more obvious that he's out of place.
If he DOES do that, is it racist, or is it common sense? Or is it racism disguised as common sense?? Do you think he was TRAINED to respond that way??? I'll bet NOT. So, he/the department CAN be trained NOT to do it.
They're trained to use common sense and deductive logic. If a White guy is accused of robbing a Native family on a Native reservation, do you think the cop and the judge will or will not strongly consider the fact that a white guy being there is suspicious and odd? I'm going with yes.
It's true. You have finally hit on what separates us.. We want LOVE and HAPPINESS, and you're cool with EVERYBODY hating EVERYBODY..
Old sayings keep getting passed down, many times because of how true they really are.
Good fences make good neighbors
Libs say fuck the fence...unless it's MY house.
Taking 50 groups of people who are alien to each other, and cramming them together is a utopian pipedream. It doesn't work. Slow assimilation works. And we were headed that way. And then libs said fuck the old traditions, laws, etc and began importing everyone and anyone faster than assimilation could keep up with. Libs said assimilation was racist. The result? This. And it will get worse.
Tell me Con. On what planet do you think going to a country and telling the majority race to go fuck themselves ends in peace? Do tell.
One first has to accept the premise that they are racist, as Con did, before tackling what to do about it.
Before we can discuss a worthwhile solution, we first have to demonstrate the actual racism. If we can’t do that, then we cannot accept the premise, and no solution is beneficial anyway.
Say I accept that cops are racist and need more training. So I implement more training time at the firing range. Problem solved? No.
Let’s take Cons example. He said cops are racist and then provided an example wherein a cop should approach the situation more cautiously, while he stated that they shouldn’t.
Individually racist cops who act on their racism would not be good cops. They would breach the Constitutional Rights of citizens. They can be fired. But if policing is itself categorically racist, then we need to know in what way.
I understood what you said Con, it wasn’t convoluted. But your failure to articulate the systemic racism you suppose exists is not my failure to understand. You gave no example of systemic racism (most people believe in systemic racism as a matter of faith). The individual example you gave is easily not racism.
It’s not that I don’t understand your argument, it’s just that it’s not very good.
