Submitted by factotum on Thu, 08/27/2020 - 11:12
Septic Tanks are going to Septic Tank
Your're changing up the argument and adding new parameters. Nobody is denying the greater likelihood of being disadvantaged if you are indigenous.
I was not particularly good at maths either so help me understand, disregarding your 90-95 period which going by the graph long term is an anomaly, if you have 50 people side by side and 5 die, the next group has 250 people side by side and 5 die, wouldn't you be more likely to die in the first group?
Typical, just make an assertion based on nothing more than guesswork and throw it up. No consideration given to the fact that it could be (is) wrong and in that case would be grossly misleading on an important issue. No care, no responsibility. Welcome to Swellchan!
Between 1991 and 2016 247 indigenous people died in custody. Over the same period 1054 non-indigenous people died in custody
Indigenous people make up 27% of the prison population but only 3% of the general population. Given then that their risk of imprisonment is 9 times that of non-indigenous people then, for the overall risk of death to be equal the number of indigenous deaths should be one ninth of the non-indigenous deaths. It is more than double that.https://www.pwc.com.au/indigenous-consulting/assets/indigenous-incarcera...
Not sure there's any point arguing with these people blowfly. I put up a research paper a while ago that showed indigenous people, who were caught with a small amount of dope, were much more likely to be charged than white people. White guys typically got a warning, indigenous people got a trip to court and a record which has implications for job opportunities. This is irrefutable evidence of institutional racism, but the usual suspects will deny it exists.
"angry online, smiley in the brine"
For the sake of clarity here can someone offer up a unambiguous definition of what is institutional or systematic or structural racism.
Because to me those terms suggest it’s a deliberate act or policy on the part of courts, policing, governments which I find difficult to accept.
"For the sake of clarity here can someone offer up a unambiguous definition of what is institutional or systematic or structural racism."
Discriminatory policies can be, but definitely not need be involved.
"Structural Racism encompasses the entire system of white supremacy, diffused and infused in all aspects of society, including our history, culture, politics, economics and our entire social fabric. Structural Racism is the most profound and pervasive form of racism – all other forms of racism (e.g. institutional, interpersonal, internalized, etc.) emerge from structural racism. Indicators/Manifestations: The key indicators of structural racism are inequalities in power, access, opportunities, treatment, and policy impacts and outcomes, whether they are intentional or not. Structural racism is more difficult to locate in a particular institution because it involves the reinforcing effects of multiple institutions and cultural norms, past and present, continually producing new, and re-producing old forms of racism."
There are numerous overlapping definitions Guy. Google a few. It is not always deliberate now, but has its roots in deliberate actions in the past that still impact society today. Consider the denial of citizenship and welfare rights that persisted into the 1960s and so directly reduced the opportunities of many living indigenous people, either directly or by the poverty that was inflicted on their parents. Consider the widespread racist beliefs and demeaning terms that were still commonly used well into the 1970s and beyond. Consider the fact that real estate agents commonly denied indigenous people the right to buy property or even rent in large areas of our towns and cities ......and it still persists today.https://www.buzzfeed.com/hannahryan/aboriginal-renting-racial-discrimina...
Look i'm not getting into this one-upmanship. And i'm not disputing any of the above regarding racism, disadvantage and the like.
But a few posts back you said an aboriginal person is 16 times more likely to die in custody and the way I interpreted the figures that overall as a percentage of the prisons population you are less likely to die if you are indigenous.
Then, you just above said you are twice as likely die in custody, so which is it? Twice or sixteen times?
I'm not trying to be a smart-arse or antagonize anyone, but if you're going to put up links, people are going to read them and people are naturally going to have questions. If they interpret it wrong well point it out- is the aggression warranted?
Anyway, i'm not ruining my Sunday getting into this tit-for-tat. I'm building a deck, listening to tunes and gonna wash off with a surf this arvo.
You guys can have at it.
I answered this before.
"Between 1990 and 1995, Indigenous people were 16.5 times more likely than non-Indigenous people to die in custody. But, almost 30 years since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, the Indigenous incarceration rate has doubled."
Key point 1990 -1995. Indo's graph shows the the same data over a much longer period including a spike over the period 1990-1995.
The "twice as likely" is drawn from data for the period 1991 - 2016. If you have more recent data or a more sophisticated statistical analysis I would be glad to see it. My argument for the "twice as likely" conclusion is set out in a previous post.
Been reading this back and forth for the last day or so and have no wish to enter into the debate but this popped up on my newsfeed last night and seems relevant to the discussion of institutionalised racism within the Victorian Police Force?https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/aboriginal-man-accuses-polic...
"Systemic racism does not exist in Australia."
Helluva 'dead cat' there.
Got a page and a half (and counting).
Jeez, I wonder what that 'very fine person' will come up with next?
Something with a certain underlying tinge?
Is there a bookie in the land that will take the bet?
I could do with a cocktail this arvo.
Thanks for your replies. I've worked in community programs for more than 2 decades and directly with/in Aboriginal communities for 4 years. I do not deny discrimination and racism exists. Further, in the past government programs and policies entrenched what today we all would reasonably call discrimination and racism. In my opinion the way refugees were treated (demonised) by successive federal governments over the last 10-20 years most certainly fuelled unhelpful race type debates in the community. Politicians have an obligation to lead not divide people. But I really do struggle with the notion that racism exists today in an institutional sense, there are state and federal laws against it, sure the genie exists in lots and lots of people and some fringe organisations but calling it institutional or systematic or structural in Australia at this time in history is a bridge too far.
Only my opinion .....
"But I really do struggle with the notion that racism exists today in an institutional sense, "
I find it hard to believe that anyone looking at the first graphic I posted earlier could imagine that institutional racism no longer exists. To believe that is to accept that an indigenous youth incarceration rate 25 times higher than that for non-indigenous youth is both acceptable and has nothing to do with existing social structures. Sorry Guy, but you're kidding yourself.
"If you're going to put up links, people are going to read them..."
You're a rare breed, sir.
Pass it on to Sepp, Info, and Sweetie.
that would be a reasonable opinion to have guysmiley
the argument of structural and institutional racism some talk of seems to have moved onto a form of cultural racism criticism. as guysmiley points out, many efforts and laws have been made to overcome what is, and was, obvious sttuctural racism to most people
now the argument is largely about so callled 'white supremacy'. and how white culture subtlely excludes certain people from the game, rather than any specific oppresive laws. their answer to this is to tear down all that is white and replace it with brown demigods, who will lead us all to prosperity under a brown man lead revolutuion (...all?)
aside from the naivety, the concept seems to totally overlook that a population is made up of various cultures and proportiions, and of course dominant cultural population percentages are going to have dominant cultural influences
'white supremacy' is the biggest bullshit argument ever. most white people have nothing to do with what this sensationalist catch cry suggests. most white people are just battling under the same oppresive capitalist system as everyone else, and they are more than happy to have brown people by their side in that drudgery
The idea that in 2014, one in thirteen of all Aboriginal adult males in Western Australia was in prison is absolutely horrifying.
There are clearly structural issues.
5th time's a charm?
"Systemic [or institutional] racism...is different from individual racism because it describes the outcomes of activities and processes rather than intentions and attitudes, and reflects organisational, rather than individual, failure to understand the impact of policies and procedures...
Systemic discrimination can occur “irrespective of the intent of the individuals who carry out the activities of the institution” (Bowling, in Macpherson, 1999).
It focuses attention, therefore, on the negative unintended consequences of policies that are imagined, designed and implemented without full realisation of their potential impact: or made on the basis of stereotyped images, circulating within the cultures of organisations as well as within society at large.
The systemic racism construct focuses attention on institutional processes and
outcomes: where racism is the product but not necessarily the intention of behaviours, policies and practices.
However, racist attitudes may be underpinned by systemic factors, individual racist attitudes do not exist in a vacuum: they may draw upon collective or culturally embedded images, stereotypes and representations.
Individuals may feel empowered in their racism because they may feel that their behaviour is implicitly, if not officially, sanctioned within their organisation."
"Not at all. If you stand two people beside each other, one indigenous the other non-"indigenous, the indigenous person is still more much more likely to die in custody than the non-indigenous one. Any presentation of the data that does not include that fact is misleading. If you don't understand why that is so then you probably didn't pay much attention in Maths classes."
I was bad at maths im still bad at maths so I honestly can't see how that is the case?
Correct me if im wrong, but doesn't per 100 mean they take figures of 100 indigenous people in custody and 100 non indigenous people in custody and compare the rates of the two? (divided the whole in custody numbers by 100)
Which actually means if you compare two people in custody side by side the non indigenous person actually has a very slightly higher chance of dying in custody.
Why that is the case i dont know, maybe its the opposite of systemic racism where the system actually goes to a little more effort to prevent deaths in custody?
IMHO the whole system is clearly the opposite of systemic racist, the whole system is set up to try to improve the life of indigenous people and close the gaps that are there. (ad sadly will always be there)
Did we have a system with systemic racism in the past?...100% we did, there was even a time where indigenous people couldn't vote.
Anyway the graph was from this article, there has been a few more similar articles of late, but i could remember the key words to bring this up https://www.anthonydillon.com.au/single-post/2019/07/07/A-Closer-Look-at...
Even the Gaurdian a while back have admitted the same but was not highlighted in their article, kind of there but focus on other aspects.
BTW. About me using the wrong word last night, quite simply it was late and i was tired and auto spell picked the wrong word and i didn't pick up on it, although we all know im crap at spelling or sentence construction etc, but im good at other things so it doesn't phase me, we all have strengths and weaknesses.
Please Stunet give me an ignore button for Talking Turkey, Shatners Basoon, Dale Cooper, Factotum, Pupkin, and any new fake profile he decides to create.
"The idea that in 2014, one in thirteen of all Aboriginal adult males in Western Australia was in prison is absolutely horrifying.
There are clearly structural issues."
a truly disgusting statistic , but under current influences we just seem to be looking in all the wrong places
"If you stand two people beside each other, one indigenous the other non-"indigenous, the indigenous person is still more much more likely to die in custody than the non-indigenous one. "
Indo, the statement refers to the whole population not just those incarcerated. The problem is at least as much with your comprehension as with your maths.
Syppo, where are we currently looking and where should we look?
Meanwhile, to get back on the thread track...
"It's always good for a laugh when Trumpoids start telling us Trump never insulted POWs, wounded warriors, the Fallen, etc. The internet has kept the receipts. HIS receipts, straight from the source. Not random bystanders "interpreting".
For those who don't believe it's real here's the fucking tweet itself."
For the YouTube resurchers:
As a side note for all you politically engaged types, have you noticed our very own head of state, when giving an official speech, start with the acknowledgement of country AND a 'thank you for your service' military style spiel?
What's that all about??
And remember when he first got the gig, he insisted his cabinet (well, tried to insist) that they all wear a little Aussie flag emblem on the lapel, Seppo style?
Okay. well that's just a silly way to look at things.
Again it just comes down to indigenous people committing a much higher rate of crimes.
If you want to lower both incarceration rates and deaths in custody rates, the obvious solution is to lower indigenous crime rates.
Which is never going to happen because integration is a dirty word.
One for the numpties on here to remember.
Indigenous people are racially profiled, they are more likely to live in low socio economic areas, and way more likely to have the book thrown at them. Can you guess why? I'll give you a hint. Starts with R.
"Again it just comes down to indigenous people committing a much higher rate of crimes."
Congratulations Indo. Now go back and read the several pages devoted to the reasons that occurs that you have not bothered reading.
Oh and take your offensice and patronising observation....
"If you want to lower both incarceration rates and deaths in custody rates, the obvious solution is to lower indigenous crime rates.
Which is never going to happen because integration is a dirty word."
....and shove it where the sun don't shine.
Maybe Caspar Dreaming is right. How's that indigenous bloke riding on the footpath on his way to work in Melbourne the other day?
Now if he was a white guy, the cops would have tackled him, roughed him up a bit, charged him, and called him a white cunt.
Because in Caspar's fantasy land, there's no such thing as institutional racism.
After I posted my most recent comments I found myself reflecting on the incarceration rates of Aboriginals in the remote areas of the country and thought yes there's something to the argument about institutional racism in those parts of Australia. Having reached that view I then thought the problem could also be made much worse by poor laws e.g. public drunkenness disproportionally impacting on Aboriginal communities. So the issue then becomes how are those laws policed in such a way as to be sensitive to the cultural, socio economic and remoteness needs of the Aboriginal communities ... and on this last point I thought governments, perhaps inadequately, were working hard to improve the way police do their job in consultation with communities. While noting the negative outcomes for Aboriginal communities are the existence of these laws institutional racism or just poor or outdated law making and policing?
I got involved in this discussion because I dislike people being accused of racism when legitimately discussing subjects like immigration. Further, terms like institutional or systematic or structural racism are loosely and dishonestly thrown around here to prosecute / defend an argument. Anyway, hoping today's discussion might improve forum discourse.
.... and right on cue there it is again
GS. Seriously mate. If you want to see a text book example of institutional racism in Australia, read the link. It's extremely hard to argue it doesn't occur after finishing the article.
" I dislike people being accused of racism when legitimately discussing subjects like immigration"
People who say this can't possibly be acting in good faith.
Either that or they are possibly a little bit simple.
People who say "I dislike people being accused of racism when legitimately discussing subjects like immigration" can't possibly be acting in good faith?
Haha, speaking of not acting in good faith...
"where are we currently looking and where should we look?"
for a start, deferring all influence to a bunch of angry ip obsessed (deranged), radicals in the street who write ACAB everywhere is all kinds of dumb
all cops are not bastards, or even remotely bad
...unless you're a nutty revolutionary, spoiling for your anarcho socialist CHAZ style utopia, ...that went well...
most cops are just doing their job as guided by the rules. the rules have changed considerably over the last 30 years, due to increasing violence, but also often to be more accomodating to black people's cultures and needs, the data even suggests that
despite what one track says (viclocal), most people who work in social services and policing would argue aboriginal people are actually given more chances, not less, yes some cooked article at guardian might make a convincing story but the reality would appear otherwise
that's not to say aboriginals aren't targeted more in the first place, but charged more, with harder penalties... yeh nah...
"Indigenous people are racially profiled, they are more likely to live in low socio economic areas, and way more likely to have the book thrown at them. Can you guess why? I'll give you a hint. Starts with R."
that's one way to look at it, another way is to say that all the rogues in those low socio economic areas are targeted disproportionately whether they are black or white or yellow. which they are. and because some of those areas have a high percentage of aboriginal peolple, it can seem really really racist, really really really racist actually, when really its just a bit racist, ...and a lot lot low socio economic-ist....
gotta stop blackfellas getting locked up, its as simple as that, blaming cops is just a dumb simplistc scape goating argument that will fix nothing
blm really need to update their material, they brought a 1990's knife fight argument, to a 2020 internet apocalypse nuclear war
and it shows in their data
Im betting like many Guardian articles there is aspects that they have intentionally left out and another side of the coin that explains the bigger picture.
I notice there is no mention in the article of likelihood of prior convictions for each group which obviously affect penalties given and could and more likely explain the difference in stats.
"I notice there is no mention in the article of likelihood of prior convictions for each group which obviously affect penalties given and could and more likely explain the difference in stats."
Do you see what you did there? it's why I generally don't waste my time discussing anything with ideological warriors. They start off with one example and quickly more onto another and another in a increasingly desperate attempt to prove they are right.
I don't need your link/resurch. Remember when it emerged that a small number of Victorian police at one or maybe two western suburbs stations were racial profiling black African youth? When it became to the attention of senior management and the government all the police involved were counselled, retrained, warned, discipled. We are talking about 20-30 police, so how does this example reflect on the thousands of other Victorian police. Do they all get labelled with the same sweeping broad brush? The vast majority of cops do a good job under extremely difficult circumstances, here in Victoria at some stations 60% of all their work involves domestic violence. 60% for FFS and again do remember the cultural change initiated VicPol and the Government following on from the findings of the Royal Commission into DV after Rosie Batty's son was clubbed to death by her ex-husband with a cricket bat in front of her? Continual improvement, things are done better today than last year.
Mate, as I said earlier there is no denying racism exists but not everyone discussing related topics is a racist nor should they be accused of it even if it suits your narrative.
Who are you talking to, Guy?
And on here, I only see one numpty that constantly gets called out for his bigotry bollocks.
But he's a complete fucking simpleton, a coupla stubbies short of a sixer.
More to be pitied?
'Discussion' is always tainted when bigots lead the charge and set the markers.
Speaking of discussion, what's going on in the US of A?
Seeing that is the name of the fucken thread.
In regard to racial profiling
All types of profiling is important to police, if they see a women with a pram walking the street or an very old couple, they are most likely going to give a quick glimpse, if they are young teenage boys, you can bet they will slow down and see what they are up too.
If cops have a problem with crime by a certain ethnic group in an area they are going to pay more attention to that group, it would be bad policing if they didnt.
BTW. Most crime committed by indigenous people is against indigenous people, if the cops turned a blind eye to indigenous people committing crime, end of the day the real losers are the actual broader indigenous community.
WSL strike mission slam dunks Trump's Wave Pool.
Smashed them like Guitars...[ MADE IN USA ]
Facto you are a complete fuck witt you add nothing to any conversation and just troll troll troll, and fake as all fuck with all your fake profiles, you are a serious nut job, if you aren't going to stay on topic and add something to the conversation then just shut the fuck up, and fuck off.
Fuck you guys have got some stamina I’ll give you that.
All day every day same people, same arguing, insulting, abusing...
seriously how can you be fucked???
"Please Stunet give me an ignore button for Talking Turkey, Shatners Basoon, Dale Cooper, Factotum, Pupkin, and any new fake profile he decides to create."
Take your own whiny advice, numbnuts.
And what's the thread called again?
Start your own "I'm not racist, but..." one. Tell your mate.
Im betting like many Guardian articles there is aspects that they have intentionally left out and another side of the coin that explains the bigger picture."
Absolute rubbish Caspar. The Guardian is just reporting the findings of an academic study which showed indigenous people were much more likely to be charged with cannabis possession when caught with a small amount compared to white people. This idea that The Guardian deliberately left out information from that academic report is just pure fantasy.
Do you want to know what the "bigger picture" or "other side of the coin" is in this case? White people are much more likely to be let off with a warning.
Classic TBB - wheres a tsunami when you need one?