• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

WSJ op-ed by longtime conservative activist: Black Lives Matter based on myths

Status
Not open for further replies.
I saw this today and was pretty dumbfounded. It's probably the most racist and downright infuriating article I've ever seen posted on a mainstream news publication.

Edit: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myths-of-black-lives-matter-1455235686

I'm going to selectively bold some of the parts that stood out to me, and I'm going to insert some commentary in certain places.

A television ad for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign now airing in South Carolina shows the candidate declaring that “too many encounters with law enforcement end tragically.” She later adds: “We have to face up to the hard truth of injustice and systemic racism.”

Her Democratic presidential rival, Bernie Sanders, met with the Rev. Al Sharpton on Wednesday. Mr. Sanders then tweeted that “As President, let me be very clear that no one will fight harder to end racism and reform our broken criminal justice system than I will.” And he appeared on the TV talk show “The View” saying, “It is not acceptable to see unarmed people being shot by police officers.”

Apparently the Black Lives Matter movement has convinced Democrats and progressives that there is an epidemic of racist white police officers killing young black men. Such rhetoric is going to heat up as Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders court minority voters before the Feb. 27 South Carolina primary.

But what if the Black Lives Matter movement is based on fiction? Not just the fictional account of the 2014 police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., but the utter misrepresentation of police shootings generally.

To judge from Black Lives Matter protesters and their media and political allies, you would think that killer cops pose the biggest threat to young black men today. But this perception, like almost everything else that many people think they know about fatal police shootings, is wrong.

This is interesting because right from the start this article, written by a white woman, is telling you that black people's lived experience is wrong. I think the applicable term might be whitesplaining? This goes beyond that though.


The Washington Post has been gathering data on fatal police shootings over the past year and a half to correct acknowledged deficiencies in federal tallies. The emerging data should open many eyes.

For starters, fatal police shootings make up a much larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths than black homicide deaths. According to the Post database, in 2015 officers killed 662 whites and Hispanics, and 258 blacks. (The overwhelming majority of all those police-shooting victims were attacking the officer, often with a gun.) Using the 2014 homicide numbers as an approximation of 2015’s, those 662 white and Hispanic victims of police shootings would make up 12% of all white and Hispanic homicide deaths. That is three times the proportion of black deaths that result from police shootings.

Funny statistics for the win. We can make the numbers tell a completely different story by changing what we use for the denominator. Of course now we're measuring something completely different and barely even related to what BLM is all about, but why should that stop us?

The lower proportion of black deaths due to police shootings can be attributed to the lamentable black-on-black homicide rate. There were 6,095 black homicide deaths in 2014—the most recent year for which such data are available—compared with 5,397 homicide deaths for whites and Hispanics combined. Almost all of those black homicide victims had black killers.

Police officers—of all races—are also disproportionately endangered by black assailants. Over the past decade, according to FBI data, 40% of cop killers have been black. Officers are killed by blacks at a rate 2.5 times higher than the rate at which blacks are killed by police.

Some may find evidence of police bias in the fact that blacks make up 26% of the police-shooting victims, compared with their 13% representation in the national population. But as residents of poor black neighborhoods know too well, violent crimes are disproportionately committed by blacks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there.

Such a concentration of criminal violence in minority communities means that officers will be disproportionately confronting armed and often resisting suspects in those communities, raising officers’ own risk of using lethal force.

That last part is great. It's like a 12 year old getting killed for holding a toy gun is justified because minority communities are more dangerous.

The Black Lives Matter movement claims that white officers are especially prone to shooting innocent blacks due to racial bias, but this too is a myth. A March 2015 Justice Department report on the Philadelphia Police Department found that black and Hispanic officers were much more likely than white officers to shoot blacks based on “threat misperception”—that is, the mistaken belief that a civilian is armed.

A 2015 study by University of Pennsylvania criminologist Greg Ridgeway, formerly acting director of the National Institute of Justice, found that, at a crime scene where gunfire is involved, black officers in the New York City Police Department were 3.3 times more likely to discharge their weapons than other officers at the scene.

Here's the one part of the entire article that has some merit, and it's buried near the end.

The Black Lives Matter movement has been stunningly successful in changing the subject from the realities of violent crime. The world knows the name of Michael Brown but not Tyshawn Lee, a 9-year-old black child lured into an alley and killed by gang members in Chicago last fall. Tyshawn was one of dozens of black children gunned down in America last year. The Baltimore Sun reported on Jan. 1: “Blood was shed in Baltimore at an unprecedented pace in 2015, with mostly young, black men shot to death in a near-daily crush of violence.”

Those were black lives that mattered, and it is a scandal that outrage is heaped less on the dysfunctional culture that produces so many victims than on the police officers who try to protect them.

So here we've got victim blaming. We shouldn't be angry that people like Tamir Rice, Eric Garner or Freddie Gray were needlessly killed by police; we should really be blaming black culture.

I can't even deal with this crap. I feel like establishment conservatism has dropped all pretense of not being racist. The right is going fucking nuts.
 
The title almost sounds like they're saying that black lives actually do not matter

And frankly I would not be surprised if that was the actual position.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
WSJ doesn't understand what the word 'proportion' means? Amazing.
 
The Michael Brown shooting autopsy not matching the "hands up don't shoot" narrative is all that matters, I guess. It's the first and only thing I hear about when I hear people talk about BLM in vaguely terroristic terms.

Let's not acknowledge it as a straw that broke the camel's back, no. Let's just say it was a myth acting as a firestarter without wondering where all the dry brush came from.
 

injurai

Banned
Who's the editor that pushed this through?

fake edit: Forget it, we live in a click based economy, that question is probably irrelevant.
 

Kyosaiga

Banned
For starters, fatal police shootings make up a much larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths than black homicide deaths

ojfsajfoajgoiajfisd



THAT'S NOT HOW FUCKING STATISTICS WORK!
 

Fracas

#fuckonami
"Now I know it's virtually open season on unarmed black men, but I'm gonna tell you why your very real feelings don't matter"
 

Gamerloid

Member
Saved by Wall Street forcing me to subscribe/sign in to see the full article. I'm not ready for such a level of stupidity noted in the OP.
 

Paz

Member
What is wrong with some people, the person writing this article and creating a rallying point for like-minded assholes is just a piece of trash.

I say this as a half Indian Australian man who has no stakes in this particular movement but can see the blatantly obvious in the world.
 

hawk2025

Member
For starters, fatal police shootings make up a much larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths than black homicide deaths. According to the Post database, in 2015 officers killed 662 whites and Hispanics, and 258 blacks. (The overwhelming majority of all those police-shooting victims were attacking the officer, often with a gun.) Using the 2014 homicide numbers as an approximation of 2015’s, those 662 white and Hispanic victims of police shootings would make up 12% of all white and Hispanic homicide deaths. That is three times the proportion of black deaths that result from police shootings.


This is infuriating.
 
nothing new, stay bitter and racist.

Yep. I also always find the "well X group is actually even more of a victim of this issue BLM is fighting against". It's like, ok you've just acknowledged that indeed there is an issue with police brutality but aren't concerned with that but with the fact that someone else is concerned? Because whites and Hispanics are killed more, the BLM movement looking for a way to curb that epidemic at all is some kind of insult?
 

Kyosaiga

Banned
I see the "Black people kill other black people in larger numbers" argument all the time. Whats the counter argument to that?

The counter argument is that black people killing other black people is IRRELEVANT to the fact that Black men are disproportionately more likely than whites to be fatally shot by the police.
 

BitStyle

Unconfirmed Member
Smfh, "fiction"?
Writing off people's deaths as fiction must take some hella warped reality on their part.
 
I guess the title change adds some detail, but I don't think that trying to between WSJ's opinion section and the rest of the paper is meaningful at this point. The editorial staff for the most part is just as bad as these guest writers, and they're the highest ranking people at the paper.
 
I see the "Black people kill other black people in larger numbers" argument all the time. Whats the counter argument to that?

That it's the exact same for every racial group. White people in white communities kill their fellow white people. Hispanic people in Hispanic communities kill their fellows too. The black on black thing is a dumb gotcha used without any of that context to make it seem like black peoples are just naturally more violent.
It also has nothing to do with the fact that black citizens that kill other black citizens aren't tax payed employees charged with protecting their communities like police are.
 
Assuming all the data points are true, it's always a shame to see people use data to make such shitty conclusions.

"hey black people, all of that perceived racism you've been witnessing your whole life is just made up inside your head"
 
unethical-medicine-lobotomy-orig.jpg

I think this just happened to me while reading this.
 
The title almost sounds like they're saying that black lives actually do not matter

And frankly I would not be surprised if that was the actual position.
Nah, she makes a phony and emotive appeal to the tragedy of black on black crime by citing the death of black children killed in gang warfare.
The article is very deliberately insinuating that black people killed by police aren't worthy of victimhood.
The only worthy victims, in her world, are blacks killed by other black people, which she attributes to the moral and cultural failure of black people.
Her whole argument is that black men killed by cops is the direct result of black cultural deviancy, which police are only trying to contain. "How can you fault cops for shooting you when so many of you are murdering criminals", she asks.
This woman is racist as fuck.
 

Guess Who

Banned
For starters, fatal police shootings make up a much larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths than black homicide deaths. According to the Post database, in 2015 officers killed 662 whites and Hispanics, and 258 blacks. (The overwhelming majority of all those police-shooting victims were attacking the officer, often with a gun.) Using the 2014 homicide numbers as an approximation of 2015’s, those 662 white and Hispanic victims of police shootings would make up 12% of all white and Hispanic homicide deaths. That is three times the proportion of black deaths that result from police shootings.

completely irrelevant statistic

The lower proportion of black deaths due to police shootings can be attributed to the lamentable black-on-black homicide rate. There were 6,095 black homicide deaths in 2014—the most recent year for which such data are available—compared with 5,397 homicide deaths for whites and Hispanics combined. Almost all of those black homicide victims had black killers.

notice no mention of white-on-white crime rates, or hispanic-on-hispanic crime rates. no mention of how homicide frequency correlates to poverty.

Some may find evidence of police bias in the fact that blacks make up 26% of the police-shooting victims, compared with their 13% representation in the national population. But as residents of poor black neighborhoods know too well, violent crimes are disproportionately committed by blacks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there.

notice how no critical eye is applied to that entire last set of statistics and they are just used as proof blacks commit more crime - those are statistics on how often blacks are charged with each crime, not how often they commit said crimes. of course in a racist system blacks will be charged disproportionately more, that's the whole point!

The Black Lives Matter movement claims that white officers are especially prone to shooting innocent blacks due to racial bias, but this too is a myth. A March 2015 Justice Department report on the Philadelphia Police Department found that black and Hispanic officers were much more likely than white officers to shoot blacks based on “threat misperception”—that is, the mistaken belief that a civilian is armed.

A 2015 study by University of Pennsylvania criminologist Greg Ridgeway, formerly acting director of the National Institute of Justice, found that, at a crime scene where gunfire is involved, black officers in the New York City Police Department were 3.3 times more likely to discharge their weapons than other officers at the scene.

minorities aren't immune to prejudice - internalizing racism when you work in a racist system is completely expected. the first set of data is also only data from one police department. the second set of data is yet another completely irrelevant statistic.

The world knows the name of Michael Brown but not Tyshawn Lee, a 9-year-old black child lured into an alley and killed by gang members in Chicago last fall. Tyshawn was one of dozens of black children gunned down in America last year.

gang members killing innocent people is expected; police officers killing innocent people shouldn't be.
 
Nah, she makes a phony and emotive appeal to the tragedy of black on black crime by citing the death of black children killed in gang warfare.
The article is very deliberately insinuating that black people killed by police aren't worthy of victimhood.
The only worthy victims, in her world, are blacks killed by other black people, which she attributes to the moral and cultural failure of black people.
Her whole argument is that black men killed by cops is the direct result of black cultural deviancy, which police are only trying to contain. "How can you fault cops for shooting you when so many of you are murdering criminals", she asks.
This woman is racist as fuck.

This is a perfect breakdown of my issues with the op-ed. I was thinking all this, but couldn't quite articulate it. Thanks.
 
I see the "Black people kill other black people in larger numbers" argument all the time. Whats the counter argument to that?

"Yes, communities are deliberately segregated by race. And in black communities, resources and opportunities are extremely limited. Is it any surprise that an underemployed community struggling to make ends meet is going to have more crime? Black on black crime is a byproduct of racism and poor societal conditions."

Those who don't understand this or don't care to understand this have the cause and effect backwards.
 

sephi22

Member
That it's the exact same for every racial group. White people in white communities kill their fellow white people. Hispanic people in Hispanic communities kill their fellows too. The black on black thing is a dumb gotcha used without any of that context to make it seem like black peoples are just naturally more violent.
From what I understand, she's saying a police officer is more likely to consider himself in danger while confronting a black suspect as opposed to whites or hispanics because 6000 white on white deaths are a much smaller number coz whites are a majority and 6000 black on black deaths is much bigger as there are much fewer black people than white people.

I'm not saying that she's right or you're wrong, I'm just trying to understand her point. It makes sense for an officer to feel more threatened when they're told that 17% of the country's population has more homicides than the 60% majority. (I'm sorry if my numbers are wrong.)

"Yes, communities are deliberately segregated by race. And in black communities, resources and opportunities are extremely limited. Is it any surprise that an underemployed community struggling to make ends meet is going to have more crime? Black on black crime is a byproduct of racism and poor societal conditions."

Those who don't understand this or don't care to understand this have the cause and effect backwards.
I understand. Black people aren't biologically any more violent than any other race, and a lot of crime is because of the system and the situations that these communities are placed in. However, while this explains black on black crime, the point about an officer feeling more threatened in crime ridden areas and more likely to use force also makes sense, doesn't it?
 

Slayven

Member
From what I understand, she's saying a police officer is more likely to consider himself in danger while confronting a black suspect as opposed to whites or hispanics because 6000 white on white deaths are a much smaller number coz whites are a majority and 6000 black on black deaths is much bigger as there are much fewer black people than white people.

I'm not saying that she's write or you're wrong, I'm just trying to understand her point. It makes sense for an officer to feel more threatened when they're told that 17% of the country's population has more homicides than the 60% majority. (I'm sorry if my numbers are wrong.)

That ties into the Superhuman Black Boogey man.
 
I see the "Black people kill other black people in larger numbers" argument all the time. Whats the counter argument to that?

The counter is; IT'S THE SAME FOR EVERY RACE (not yelling at you) whites kill whites, Hispanics kill Hispanics a in large numbers

This BS gets regurgitated by every right-wing pundit every time we talk about race & police violence to make it seem blacks are a bunch savage beast, it's always used to dodge/deflect the topic at hand,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom