I'm guessing your google search did not yield any results...Google is biased!

Doctor Fate wrote:

freeman3 wrote:Let's look at negative stereotyping of blacks on TV.

https://www.msu.edu/~lapinsk3/Maria_Lap ... 542669.pdf
http://forms.gradsch.psu.edu/diversity/ ... Isaacs.pdf
https://library.uoregon.edu/sites/defau ... ations.pdf

But I look forward to the research that supports your point of view on this...

And of course that's not even talking about the stuff that goes out over the internet...

Google is wonderful, isn't it? Just post lists and that "proves" your point--and, if I'm not convinced, I can do what you didn't: read the articles.

No thanks.

What kind of reasoned argument is this DF?

Doctor Fate wrote:The excerpts are bad enough. I can't imagine what the whole thing is like.

Question: why is it that we have the Patriot Act when they don't catch nuts like this? He had a website for crying out loud!

How many other websites are there out there that are similar, but the authors don't go on to shoot up a church?

And what powers do the governments have when all someone has done is talk about their worldview? Or should have.

To many blacks since is simply the latest incident in a long series of attacks in the South by whites to intimidate blacks. Terrorism has been defined as the use of violence to obtain political ends. What makes it feel like it isn't terrorism is due to the fact that he acted alone and I think we implicitly think of terrorism as being done by an organized group

.
Latest incident? Long brutal history post slavery, is a better description.
- lynchings.
- segregation
-jim crow laws.
- racist policing during the periods of segregation.
- the KKK and their cross burning
- - Church burning, , and church bombings.
It was a church bombing that killed 4 children that finally pushed the civil rights movement forward prior to the March in Selma.

If you can call the bombers in Boston or Hassan a terrorist, you can and should call this terrorism. All were affected by the Internet and Hassan was definitely mentally ill. But whats important in this debate is that if the media, especially Fox and others on the right, finally call this terrorism.
Then the previous events all are seen in the same vein.
As John Stewart said, when America is hit by terrorism we invade two countries, we spend trillions of dollars and expend thousand of lives and continue to bomb and drone all over the world to fight terrorism.
But when terror is a white guy shooting black people in a church - the response is "What are you going to do?"

If this event is uniformly labelled terrorism, then perhaps there will be a more energetic response. Perhaps a greater willingness to take action. Even symbolic action like sending the Confederate Flag to the museum as Jeb Bush did in Florida.
As an overt symbol of intimidation, the flag should go.
This is an interesting view ...
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commenta ... orism.html

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

freeman3 wrote:Let's look at negative stereotyping of blacks on TV.

https://www.msu.edu/~lapinsk3/Maria_Lap ... 542669.pdf
http://forms.gradsch.psu.edu/diversity/ ... Isaacs.pdf
https://library.uoregon.edu/sites/defau ... ations.pdf

But I look forward to the research that supports your point of view on this...

And of course that's not even talking about the stuff that goes out over the internet...

Google is wonderful, isn't it? Just post lists and that "proves" your point--and, if I'm not convinced, I can do what you didn't: read the articles.

No thanks.

What kind of reasoned argument is this DF?

Let me help you. He cited NOT ONE FACT from those articles. I feel no compulsion to read what he may or may not have read to sort out what may or may not be true.

Anyone can post a list of articles. If he did that in court, he'd get nowhere. You can cite reports to buttress arguments, but you actually have to read and quote the reports.

Furthermore, even if the reports are accurate about the portrayal of blacks in the media, that does NOTHING to prove that is what motivated the murderer.

Furthermore, if it did motivate him, that proves NOTHING about the meta-narrative freeman3 presents as simple, irrefutable fact: that the entirety of our society is filled with racism.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:The excerpts are bad enough. I can't imagine what the whole thing is like.

Question: why is it that we have the Patriot Act when they don't catch nuts like this? He had a website for crying out loud!

How many other websites are there out there that are similar, but the authors don't go on to shoot up a church?

And what powers do the governments have when all someone has done is talk about their worldview? Or should have.

As websites are public information, they certainly could go chat him up, couldn't they?

Dylann Roof stated on his website that he was influenced by an alleged white supremacist website that detailed black on white murders.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/22/us ... acist.html

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:The excerpts are bad enough. I can't imagine what the whole thing is like.

Question: why is it that we have the Patriot Act when they don't catch nuts like this? He had a website for crying out loud!

How many other websites are there out there that are similar, but the authors don't go on to shoot up a church?

And what powers do the governments have when all someone has done is talk about their worldview? Or should have.

As websites are public information, they certainly could go chat him up, couldn't they?

Perhaps. I will repeat the first part of my first question: how many other websites are there out there that are similar?

Another: how easy is it without hindsight to link them to individuals?

Another: how many are just people blowing off steam?

Also, would a "chat" really alway work? It may just alert them to being monitored and either send them underground or prompt them to bring matters forward.

These are serious questions, before we get to the issue of what level of monitoring and intervention you want the state to have (remembering that it will not only apply to people who will become murderers)

freeman3 wrote:Dylann Roof stated on his website that he was influenced by an alleged white supremacist website that detailed black on white murders.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/22/us ... acist.html

Yes, and he was also motivated by the Trayvon Martin case.

Your point is what?

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:The excerpts are bad enough. I can't imagine what the whole thing is like.

Question: why is it that we have the Patriot Act when they don't catch nuts like this? He had a website for crying out loud!

How many other websites are there out there that are similar, but the authors don't go on to shoot up a church?

And what powers do the governments have when all someone has done is talk about their worldview? Or should have.

As websites are public information, they certainly could go chat him up, couldn't they?

Perhaps. I will repeat the first part of my first question: how many other websites are there out there that are similar?

Another: how easy is it without hindsight to link them to individuals?

Another: how many are just people blowing off steam?

Also, would a "chat" really alway work? It may just alert them to being monitored and either send them underground or prompt them to bring matters forward.

I cannot say this for certain. However, looking at his family background, his "conversion" to racism, etc., I'm a bit optimistic that there might have been a psych hold placed on him following an interview by police.

I don't know South Carolina law, but In CA, if a person was deemed a risk to his own well-being or the well-being of others, we could commit him/her for a 72 hour evaluation. Would that have changed things? We'll never know.

But, this man is definitely "not right" in the head.

As for websites, any website espousing overt racism and even violence ought to be detected and monitored. If they can't pick up this stuff using the programs and computers they have, then what good is the NSA, FBI, and the Patriot Act?

My point is that you cannot totally separate what this guy did from the larger culture. The about- face regarding the confederate flag by many politicians (many of them Republican) in South Carolina is a reflection of this. Apparently they need a lot less "proof" than you need. You keep up bringing up this straw man as if I were saying the entire culture is racist . My point was we should not put this under the rug as if it were the aberrant act of a single person and we need not take a look at the larger culture to see what may have set him off. Yes , he was troubled but that does not mean we should not make that examination.

We cannot pretend that in 50 years our culture has been transformed so that it is not conscious of race . The notion is absurd. Yes, it is a great step forward that most of us now at a conscious level are not racist even though we probably all carry around to a greater or lesser degree stereotypes about other groups. But when we deal with people in person one- to- one there is generally no problem as far differences in race. But the brain is not politically correct, our brain is not just the cerebral cortex, and the goal of our brain is for us to survive. So in a life-or-death situation if we have been conditioned to think a young black is more dangerous than other groups that will have a tendency to affect how we react. That doesn't make us bad people-- it just makes us human.

50 years is really not that long. Someone in South Carolina who was 30 then is 80 now; someone who was 20 then is 70 now. There are still a lot of people in South Carolina who grew up in a racist culture. Did those influences did magically wiped from their brain? And people in their 70s and 80s were raising children back then so one could imagine that some of that racism would have been instilled into the next generation. I would like to think that each succeeding generation is better with regard to race but again we are only 50 years out. Lest we think that this is just a problem of the South, remember the bitter opposition to school integration in the north in the 70s.

Politics also gives rise to dealing with people as groups, not individuals, which means it can be affected by stereotypical thinking even if people think they are motivated by other reasons. Was the vehement opposition to Obama solely due to his policies or due in part to his being black? Is opposition to immigration solely due that to perceived negative affects of illegal immigration or due in part to negative stereotypes about Mexicans? Did the Tea Party form solely because of concerns about the budget or were they motivated in part because of underlying concerns that other non-white groups would take advantage of the safety net? I think it is naive to think that negative feelings about other groups did not play a role with regard to the above, even if not consciously admitted.

We'll never know what set this man set off but we can be sure he was influenced by the culture around him. Taking down the Confederate flag is a concrete step in removing a symbol of racism (after all it was put up to protest the civil rights movement) that could motivate other racist acts.

As long as we are conscious of race, we will have a tendency to favor our own racial group over others. Again that kind of thinking is pretty hard-wired into our brains after several million years of hominid development Are we in a post-racial world? I don't think so.

freeman3

We'll never know what set this man set off

You're unwilling to accept his manifesto, the witness testimony of his friends about his attitudes and desires, or the testimony of the survivor he spoke to during the event?
Its pretty clear what his specific motivation was....

If you're saying we'll never know what set him on the road to the level of hatred he attained ... then we do get into a pea soup of cultural and familial influences. It doesn't matter whether you can pin the blame on any specific thing, just that we are sensitive to the possible effect each can have.
The recognition that the Confederate Battle Flag is a symbol of racism and treason - not a celebration of a mythical past - is a major step. It wasn't that long ago that one of the most popular, but stupid, television shows featured a car with a confederate flag painted across its body. That level of acceptance for a symbol like this says much about the acceptance of instilled racist attitudes at that time. (the 70s)
.

I reacted a little too quickly But it is surprising that you would critique my assessment. I said take down the flag; I quite clearly said we should look at larger cultural influences. His specific motivation (racial hatred) is obvious but what influenced him is the question here.

freeman3

Do you actually read what people write, Ricky? You keep responding to my posts as if we were opposite sides of the issue. It's quite annoying

Perhaps I'm being anal. But you said

We'll never know what set this man set off

Within the context of what you said, its incongruous. Its the kind of thing that apologists on right wing media have said in order to dodge the admission that the killings were racist.

Yes, but in the context of what I posted I think it was pretty clear that I was not trying to minimize the racial component...moving on.