On a more close to home point, do the same stances you hold for black Americans and discrimination also apply to other populations as well? Do you see aboriginal violence (sometimes cases involving frequent and widespread domestic abuse) in the same light and same rationalizations justifying them as you do discrimination against African Americians and violence? There are other examples to consider that come up on OLO from time to time. From violent crime of Muslims (is that justified because they are a minority), to issues with China or with Chinese people in Australia?

Can anything be justified even violence because people are discriminated against? Something to think about.

.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

.

You wrote :

1. « Earlier in the thread (as you've repeated) you said that violent crime is just an expression due to frustration of being discriminated against. In other words, they are not held accountable for their own actions. I reject that reasoning entirely »
.

I do too, NNS. That’s your reasoning, not mine. I never suggested that “they are not held accountable for their own actions”. Of course, they are. There are more Afro-Americans in jail than whites, Hispanics and all other categories. In 2018, black Americans represented 33% of the sentenced prison population, nearly triple their 12% share of the U.S. adult population.

2. « If there is an underlying cause or underlying factor, such as discrimination, that is an issue worth trying to fix, but it is not a justification for violent crime »

That’s correct, NNS. If you read my posts on this thread carefully you will see that I have constantly attempted to analyse the root causes of the violence and crime committed by Afro-Americans – which I identified as : slavery, racial discrimination and poverty, segregation, injustice and inequality. To which you replied :

« … it doesn't matter how it began … » (page 56 of this thread).

Discounting the importance of the root cause of a problem could result in a false analysis and an inappropriate solution that, if anything, could make the situation even worse.

Root cause analysis is generally considered to be a basic step in any problem-solving strategy, NNS. It is widely employed in business and industry, medicine (for medical diagnosis), the healthcare industry (e.g., for epidemiology) and also in what interests us here : the social sciences.

Root cause analysis does not seek to “justify” anything (e.g., “violent crime”, as you indicate). It simply seeks to identify the prime cause of a particular phenomenon and establish the chain of “cause and effect” that produces that phenomenon.

It is the application of the scientific method of investigation of a chain of events. It is not a judgement of morality as you imagine.

.

To Banjo Paterson.

You say that your reasoning does not include blacks being unaccountable for their own actions. That this was a misrepresentative statement about your position. If that is true then how do you justify your own statements?

•<<They are simply reacting to the intolerable and insupportable situation that has been imposed on them continuously>> speaking about the higher crime rate among the black communities.

•<<The violence and crime we witness are simply a reaction to the endemic racial discrimination, not the cause of it.>> If this isn't justification and rationalization of violence and crime then I don't know what is.

•<<The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution. If I had 60 minutes to solve a problem, I’d spend 55 minutes defining it and 5 minutes solving it.>> this quote you quoted you use in reference to slavery (which isn't around any more) being the root cause for violence among black Americans. The position is to deal with a problem that is no longer there as the cause of two problems that are still ongoing.

We can't get rid of slavery, it's already gone. Yet this is the consistent "root cause you are side blinded by. The root causes of crime and discrimination are tied together and they can be relieved as a community with healthy family foundations being more common. Stable two parent families can look out for the well being of the family while also undertaking the burden of a job to sustain them. (This can be done even in the face of discrimination). Yet you refuse to look at the problems as they really are and instead blame racial discrimination. Therefore, I'll ask this again, does this reasoning of racial discrimination dismissing crime also apply to aboriginals and Muslims in Australia? Does the violent crime among those populations have an excuse they can pass the blame to? Or do they also have to look at within their own actions and own up to them. Make changes in their communities instead of demanding changes be made for them in Australia at large?

.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

.

You keep asking me how I justify my statements regarding Afro-American violence and crime. I already explained to you several times that :

« The violence and crime we witness are simply a reaction to the endemic racial discrimination, not the cause of it. That is as clear as crystal. But you have to look at the whole picture to see it – not just the consequences »

The problem is you refuse to look at the whole picture – from the root causes : slavery and the perpetual racial discrimination handed down from generation to generation ever since. You wrote : « … it doesn't matter how it began … » (page 56 of this thread).

If you continue to just look at the consequences (today’s violence and crime) and refuse to look at the whole picture, you will never see the justification for my statements.

The fact is the present injustices are the logical and inevitable consequences of the past injustices. It’s as simple as that.

My statements are not intended to be a justification of today’s Afro-American violence and crime. They are simply intended to be an explanation of today’s Afro-American violence and crime.

I am not trying to prove anything. I have no axe to grind. I had no preconceived ideas about the problems. I approached them with an open mind. I carried out a root cause analysis as honestly and as objectively as I could – and indicated what I found.

I do not pretend to know what the solution to the problems is. You will notice that while I consider that you are putting the cart before the horse with your proposed solution, I have not offered one myself.

The wounds are serious, multiple, complex, and deeply embedded in the minds and psyches of the different actors involved. They have existed for centuries and will take a long time to heal. I doubt that any one person will come up with the right solution. It will probably be a group effort if we do, eventually, succeed in finding it.

.

.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

.

You then ask :

« … does this reasoning of racial discrimination dismissing crime also apply to aboriginals and Muslims in Australia? »

I don’t know why you suggest that racial discrimination dismisses crime.

I consider that racial discrimination, itself, is a crime. You may recall that I pointed out on page 57 of this thread that the slave trade was officially declared a “crime against humanity” at the anti-racism conference held in Durban in South Africa on 31 August-7 September 2001.

Perhaps it’s because you mistakenly interpreted my explanation of Afro-American violence and crime as an attempt to excuse or justify it. As I explained in my previous post, it was not. I was simply pointing out that it’s a perfectly understandable reaction to centuries of racial oppression, discrimination and segregation.

There are some similarities with the Aboriginal problems in Australia, but the root causes of those problems were different from the root causes of the racial discrimination of Afro-Americans in the US. The annexation of the Aboriginal Peoples’ country (Australia) by the British Crown and government in 1770 followed by colonisation in 1778, resulted in the extermination of 75% of the Aboriginal population, mostly by new diseases but also by mass murders and massacres as well as the loss of access to their traditional life source, their land.

As was the case in the US with the Afro-Americans, there were also cases in Australia where Aboriginal people were treated as slaves. And, of course, many people of Aboriginal origin in Australia today continue to be victims of racial discrimination and segregation.

The same causes produce the same effects whether it be in the US, Australia or anywhere else in the world – in respect of nationality, ethnicity, colour of skin, gender, religion and many other forms of social classification.

In addition to Australia’s Aboriginal peoples, you mention Muslims. You could also have mentioned Chinese, Indians and many others : LGBTQIA+s, etc.

Intolerance is a feature of narrow-minded individuals. It is these narrow-minded individuals who should be held responsible for discrimination. Not their victims.

.

Banjo,

You may have to clarify your claims that 75 % of the Aboriginal population were exterminated, and that Aboriginal people were treated as slaves.

Slavery is what existed on Hispaniola under the French Revolutionaries until they had their arses kicked by Toussaint L'Ouverture and the African-Americans who had freed the island from slavery by 1810. It seems that fraternite et egalite didn't extend quite as far as the Caribbean.

Certainly Aboriginal people here often received low wages, partly (it was claimed) to supplement the cost of rations, clothing, accommodation, etc. Pacific Islanders were tricked into signing indenture documents which kept them working in near-slave conditions for years in Queensland, although some signed up repeatedly. So certainly dreadful things happened here - but perhaps no slavery.

Often also, Aboriginal men returning from shearing had their cheques posted directly to missions, so that the cost of rations could be deducted before they received they balance. You can call that unjust if you like.

In that sense, Phillip's declaration was at least partly honoured.

Joe