Jump to content

Racist Doctrine in Come Follow Me Lesson Manual Already Distributed


Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Sounds a little vague to me, can you be a bit more specific?

It would take far too long to list all the different ways that can happen, but here's one example:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/08/what-does-defund-police-mean-george-floyd-black-lives-matter/5317240002/

Link to post
2 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Typical academic response, interesting, possibly even true and completely useless.

While I have seen people's wealth and socioeconomic conditions increased by education, I really have never heard of anyone's wealth being positively affected by changing the zip code where they were born.

How do you change the zip code where you were born?

Link to post
10 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

How do you change the zip code where you were born?

My point exactly

Link to post
14 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

It would take far too long to list all the different ways that can happen, but here's one example:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/08/what-does-defund-police-mean-george-floyd-black-lives-matter/5317240002/

Even this article seems to be quite vague on specifics.

Defund police, replace it with . . .?

I think these people are going to find out that police do more than just enforce racism.  It might even shock you to discover there are police departments in places with racially homogeneous populations. You would think these police departments would have nothing to do without having to enforce systematic racism, but they actually seem to still be quite busy.

If you defund the police all you are going to end up with is police officers recruited from the bottom of the barrel that are over worked and under paid. Maybe they can end up like police in Mexico who need to supplement their income with bribes and side jobs.

 Now that is going to help make the police behave much better.

Instead, why don't we start off with practical solutions like ending qualified immunity and no nock warrants. We could take police out of cars as well.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
4 minutes ago, Danzo said:

My point exactly

Then you've only blithely argued yourself into a rhetorical knot. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that the strongest predictor of economic success is an immutable event over which we have absolutely no control that really just indicates our parents' wealth and access to resources. That controls a person's future success more than our education, our intelligence, our work ethic, our creativity, or any other measurable trait. Your naive and a priori assumptions about sources of wealth are simply false. While the public school system is certainly an enormous problem, the zip code a person was born into actually has a strong influence on whether their public school education will be an asset or a liability, since wealthier families will provide more property taxes that create greater funding for the local schools and for programs associated with them. Here's some recent research on that:

https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/decade-of-neglect-2018.pdf

Link to post
1 minute ago, Danzo said:

Even this article seems to be quite vague on specifics.

Yes, because there are many options for the many different circumstances. You can find plenty more details if you just go looking, but if I post a plan for one city, you're just going to bark that that doesn't work everywhere, and then we're right back here where I have to explain that there are many options for the many different circumstances.

Quote

Defund police, replace it with . . .?

You evidently didn't read the article, since it repeatedly stated that "defunding" doesn't eliminate, and so does not require replacement. The responsibilities police never should have been involved with would go back to the social and community programs that used to deal with them. 

Quote

I think these people are going to find out that police do more than just enforce racism.  It might even shock you to discover there are police departments in places with racially homogeneous populations. You would think these police departments would have nothing to do without having to enforce systematic racism, but they actually seem to still be quite busy.

Please don't pretend to have the first clue what would shock me about this issue. They are still busy because the defunding of social programs leaves the police cleaning up messes they're not trained to deal with, and never seem to get very good at. The Dallas Police chief recently commented on this:

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2016/07/11/dallas-police-chief-were-asking-cops-to-do-too-much-in-this-country/

Quote

If you defund the police all you are going to end up with is police officers recruited from the bottom of the barrel that are over worked and under paid. Maybe they can end up like police in Mexico who need to supplement their income with bribes and side jobs.

Yeah, no. You're just responding ad hoc to an initiative you are just trying to rhetorically dismiss, not understand. 

Quote

 

Now that is going to help make the police behave much better.

Instead, why don't we start off with practical solutions like ending qualified immunity and no nock warrants. We could take police out of cars as well.

 

All things I agree with, and all things that fit into the "defund police" initiative. 

Link to post
3 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

Then you've only blithely argued yourself into a rhetorical knot. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that the strongest predictor of economic success is an immutable event over which we have absolutely no control that really just indicates our parents' wealth and access to resources. That controls a person's future success more than our education, our intelligence, our work ethic, our creativity, or any other measurable trait. Your naive and a priori assumptions about sources of wealth are simply false. While the public school system is certainly an enormous problem, the zip code a person was born into actually has a strong influence on whether their public school education will be an asset or a liability, since wealthier families will provide more property taxes that create greater funding for the local schools and for programs associated with them. Here's some recent research on that:

https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/decade-of-neglect-2018.pdf

While you and your experts are worrying about something you can't control, others are worrying about things they can control and changing their circumstances.

I help these people out every day. My job invoves tracking financial success for some of these individuals. Down to the penny. For you this is something you read in studies. For me it is something I do every single day.  

I have clients that were born in these bad zip codes (some in no zip code at all).  Probably a good thing they can't read your studies, otherwise they might believe them.

Try spending less time complaining about how things are and more time helping people achieve their potential. 

You keep complaining about how the system keeps people down, just try to stay out of the way of people who succeeding despite the system.

Maybe you could even spare some time out of your busy schedule and lend a hand.

There is only so much one can learn out of a book.

  • Like 1
Link to post
12 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

 

All things I agree with, and all things that fit into the "defund police" initiative. 

But none of which involve actually defunding anything.

 It always annoys me when people use words and then have to have to spend pages and pages to explain that they really don't mean what they say and mean something different and really it's a private meaning someone just made up.

It would be much easier (and create much less confusion) if they said reform police, since that appears to be what they really mean.

  • Like 2
Link to post
1 minute ago, Danzo said:

While you and your experts are worrying about something you can't control,

Except that we can, if we commit to it, mitigate the degree to which one's birthplace determines their economic success. This whole discussion is precisely about how we must address the SYSTEMIC roots of racism instead of just hacking away at the personal branches of it. If we make it so a Black child born into a poor urban neighborhood can still access a decent public education, and employment resources, and fair housing, then we actually CAN CONTROL IT. You keep looking at my discussion about SYSTEMIC ISSUES through an INDIVIDUAL LENS. You are not even pretending to listen.

Quote

 

others are worrying about things they can control and changing their circumstances.

I help these people out every day. My job invoves tracking financial success for some of these individuals. Down to the penny. For you this is something you read in studies. For me it is something I do every single day.  

 

Ah, so here's where you thump your chest and argue that anecdotal evidence ought to overrule decades of research. 

Quote

 

I have clients that were born in these bad zip codes (some in no zip code at all).  Probably a good thing they can't read your studies, otherwise they might believe them.

Try spending less time complaining about how things are and more time helping people achieve their potential. 

You keep complaining about how the system keeps people down, just try to stay out of the way of people who succeeding despite the system.

Maybe you could even spare some time out of your busy schedule and lend a hand.

There is only so much one can learn out of a book.

 

Yeah, that's kinda why I have run for office twice and volunteer plenty for a number of different organizations. Maybe just ask about how I spend my free time next time you're thinking about trying to drop the rhetorical hammer, but have nothing to go on but a misguided assumption. Have a good one, Danzo.

  • Like 3
Link to post
9 minutes ago, Danzo said:

But none of which involve actually defunding anything.

 It always annoys me when people use words and then have to have to spend pages and pages to explain that they really don't mean what they say and mean something different and really it's a private meaning someone just made up.

It would be much easier (and create much less confusion) if they said reform police, since that appears to be what they really mean.

Do they?

Link to post
5 minutes ago, Danzo said:

But none of which involve actually defunding anything.

Right, because social movements are only allowed to do whatever falls within the boundaries of the dictionary definition of the name of their movement, and using a post to just state that is totally a good-faith and meaningful contribution to a discussion about a phenomenally complex national social issue, and you're clearly capable of engaging some nuance and complexity. Good grief do you need to do better, dude.

Link to post
2 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Do they?

Really hard to say. From what  i've read, I am not sure they themselves know quite what they mean. I think people are just upset and want to change something.

Power abhors a vacuum, so if the police departments go away, something will replace it.

Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Dan McClellan said:

Right, because social movements are only allowed to do whatever falls within the boundaries of the dictionary definition of the name of their movement, and using a post to just state that is totally a good-faith and meaningful contribution to a discussion about a phenomenally complex national social issue, and you're clearly capable of engaging some nuance and complexity. Good grief do you need to do better, dude.

Using words with their common meaning facilitates understanding. Private definitions foster misunderstandings.  You carry a big risk of alienating people that otherwise might agree with you use words that don't mean what people think they mean.  As an academic,  surely you understand the importance of using words with agreed upon meanings when communicating ideas.

You don't seem to be aware of the panic the words 'defund police ' cause among people who are not aware of your specialized meaning of those words.   I

When I first heard the words I thought it was some kind of joke.

 

Edited by Danzo
  • Like 2
Link to post
7 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Really hard to say. From what  i've read, I am not sure they themselves know quite what they mean. I think people are just upset and want to change something.

Power abhors a vacuum, so if the police departments go away, something will replace it.

When words are put to arcane uses, somebody's usually lying, in my experience.

  • Like 1
Link to post
3 minutes ago, USU78 said:

When words are put to arcane uses, somebody's usually lying, in my experience 

I think everyone thinks it means something different.

Ambiguity can be very dangerous, though.  I think that the people leading these sorts of protests love making laws too much to give up on the idea of law enforcement entirely.

  • Like 1
Link to post
12 hours ago, Dan McClellan said:

There would be plenty of phenomenally wealthy people whose wealth would not be growing nearly as rapidly, and there would be a reconfiguration of the economy, but it wouldn't result in poverty, much less the widespread and generations-long poverty and oppression of Reconstruction. 

Are you suggesting that the phenomenally wealthy (whether their gains can be traced to slavery or not) are the primary key to relatively painlessly and promptly resolving systemic racism?

With regards to my earlier question, which I hope I've clarified enough to get a more direct reply ( Posted 12 hours ago ), where does this leave others in terms of wider popular "movements" or "campaigns" where people of less than phenomenal capacity, yet recognizing their own degree of advantaged capacity, put skin in the game? For example, just in the spirit of brain-storming: For the next four generations, people leave their estates to organizations advancing the cause of removing systemic racism rather to their children. Or a family values include that one or more of their children marry someone of another race, all other things being equal (similar in tone as those who in the current wisdom prioritize marrying someone of the same socioeconomic status or higher). Participation in the movement is voluntary, but we can see how that enables systemic change.

It seems to me that the colonization of the New World (and other colonization for that matter) began as an economically-motivated movement among royalty which contributed to the use of slavery, war, etc. The Book of Mormon teaches how the Lord's direct intervention leveraged that for good -- despite all that was done! -- by visiting those who are receptive to His light which shines amid such darkness.

Link to post
2 hours ago, CV75 said:

Are you suggesting that the phenomenally wealthy (whether their gains can be traced to slavery or not) are the primary key to relatively painlessly and promptly resolving systemic racism?

They're certainly one of the biggest obstacles. 

Quote

 

With regards to my earlier question, which I hope I've clarified enough to get a more direct reply ( Posted 12 hours ago ), where does this leave others in terms of wider popular "movements" or "campaigns" where people of less than phenomenal capacity, yet recognizing their own degree of advantaged capacity, put skin in the game? For example, just in the spirit of brain-storming: For the next four generations, people leave their estates to organizations advancing the cause of removing systemic racism rather to their children. Or a family values include that one or more of their children marry someone of another race, all other things being equal (similar in tone as those who in the current wisdom prioritize marrying someone of the same socioeconomic status or higher). Participation in the movement is voluntary, but we can see how that enables systemic change.

It seems to me that the colonization of the New World (and other colonization for that matter) began as an economically-motivated movement among royalty which contributed to the use of slavery, war, etc. The Book of Mormon teaches how the Lord's direct intervention leveraged that for good -- despite all that was done! -- by visiting those who are receptive to His light which shines amid such darkness.

 

I'm afraid I am not sure exactly what your question is. Are you just asking if I think those are good ideas?

Link to post
3 hours ago, Dan McClellan said:

They're certainly one of the biggest obstacles. 

I'm afraid I am not sure exactly what your question is. Are you just asking if I think those are good ideas?

No, I was asking for your thoughts (given your point that the phenomenally wealthy can absorb the costs of dismantling systemic racism) of what the less-than phenomenally wealthy can do.

And prior to that, I was asking for your thoughts on anyone who has benefited from systemic racism proportionately absorbing the costs of change (given this would be a largely qualitative self-assessment and a very rough, self-determined material estimate). I had suggested (but I'd still like your thoughts) that we would see a good deal of forgiveness being sought by the advantaged, and also a good deal rendered by the disadvantaged, assuming change was moving in the right direction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
On 6/8/2020 at 4:32 PM, Danzo said:

What system would you dismantle?

One of the really big system that needs to be dismantled is Mandatory Sentencing laws.

Although we all want people to get what's coming to them, as a practical matter mandatory sentencing laws end up giving the power of a Judge to the police and prosecutor.

If the Judge can't give you leniency,  Who can?  the prosecutor who decides what to charge, or the police, who decides what crime to investigate and arrest for.

This is why plea bargaining is so common.  Everyone knows that its the prosecutor that has all of the power, the judges hands are tied. 

The prosecutor ends up overcharging for the crime, just to threaten the defendant to accept a plea.  

People end up going to jail, not because they are guilty, but because they don't want to risk being convicted of the over inflated charges they are being threatened with. 

Edited by Danzo
  • Like 3
Link to post
29 minutes ago, Danzo said:

One of the really big system that needs to be dismantled is Mandatory Sentencing laws.

Although we all want people to get what's coming to them, as a practical matter mandatory sentencing laws end up giving the power of a Judge to the police an prosecutor.

If the Judge can't give you leniency,  Who can?  the prosecutor who decides what to charge, or the police, who decides what crime to investigate and arrest for.

This is why plea bargaining is so common.  Everyone knows that its the prosecutor that has all of the power, the judges hands are tied. 

The Judge ends up overcharging for the crime, just to threaten the defendant to accept a plea.  

People end up going to jail, not because they are guilty, but because they don't want to risk being convicted of the over inflated charges they are being threatened with. 

Here's an interesting article on this issue: https://abcnews.go.com/US/federal-judge-regrets-55-year-marijuana-sentence/story?id=28869467

  • Like 3
Link to post
2 hours ago, smac97 said:

I hope that change can happen and we retro the sentences and release all of these marijuana cases. Marijuana is not what people thought it was back when. I wonder how a peon like me can change these laws and release these poor people.

Link to post
3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I hope that change can happen and we retro the sentences and release all of these marijuana cases. Marijuana is not what people thought it was back when. I wonder how a peon like me can change these laws and release these poor people.

Change has already started. The First Step Act was signed into law in 2018. More leeway for judges on mandatory minimums plus a lot of other great Prison reforms. Also emphasized de-escalation training and training on dealing with prisoners with mental health issues.

https://sentencing.net/legislation/first-step-act-summary

"How can an inmate obtain early release or additional community custody time (home detention or halfway house) under the FSA?

An inmate may file a motion with the court and receive a reduced sentence under the Fair Sentencing Act provisions included in the FSA.

An inmate may earn time credits for completion of Evidence-Based Recidivism Reducing Programs and/or Productive Activities if they were not convicted of a non-qualifying offense.

An inmate may be approved for a compassionate release, also known as a Reduction in Sentence (RIS), based on extraordinary or compelling circumstances such as a diagnosis of a terminal illness, debilitation, or other criteria.

An inmate may request participation in the Elderly Offender Pilot based upon their age and length of term served."

Edited by bsjkki
  • Like 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

Change has already started. The First Step Act was signed into law in 2018. More leeway for judges on mandatory minimums plus a lot of other great Prison reforms. Also emphasized de-escalation training and training on dealing with prisoners with mental health issues.

https://sentencing.net/legislation/first-step-act-summary

"How can an inmate obtain early release or additional community custody time (home detention or halfway house) under the FSA?

An inmate may file a motion with the court and receive a reduced sentence under the Fair Sentencing Act provisions included in the FSA.

An inmate may earn time credits for completion of Evidence-Based Recidivism Reducing Programs and/or Productive Activities if they were not convicted of a non-qualifying offense.

An inmate may be approved for a compassionate release, also known as a Reduction in Sentence (RIS), based on extraordinary or compelling circumstances such as a diagnosis of a terminal illness, debilitation, or other criteria.

An inmate may request participation in the Elderly Offender Pilot based upon their age and length of term served."

Thanks for your time, gives me some relief!

Link to post

This link contains statistics to date about how many inmates benefited from the act.

https://www.bop.gov/inmates/fsa/

This link contains a more detailed overview. https://www.bop.gov/inmates/fsa/overview.jsp

"The First Step Act (FSA) includes a series of other criminal justice-related provisions. These provisions include a prohibition on the use of restraints on pregnant inmates in the custody of BOP and the U.S. Marshals Service. It also includes a requirement for the BOP to provide tampons and sanitary napkins that meet industry standards to prisoners for free and in a quantity that meets the healthcare needs of each prisoner. (Note that BOP policy previously addressed these requirements.)

The FSA requires BOP to provide training to correctional officers and other BOP employees (including those who contract with BOP to house inmates) on how to de-escalate encounters between an officer or employee of BOP and a civilian or an inmate, and how to identify and appropriately respond to incidents that involve people with mental illness or other cognitive deficits. BOP staff training now incorporates these requirements.

Also included is a prohibition against the use of solitary confinement for juvenile delinquents in federal custody. (BOP does not house juveniles in its facilities but its contracts comply with this aspect of the FSA.)"

 

581
Approved
  • Like 1
Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...