In economics and the study of statistics we are taught to becareful of comparing statistics based upon gap analysis only.

So for example, if I am watching two runners, and I observe that the fastest runner is 2 seconds ahead, that is gap analysis. I may say look, he is 2 seconds faster than the other guy, and yesterday he was only one second faster, that other guy must really have slowed down.

However the problem with this form of analysis is that we don't know what happened to the slower guy unless we know what he started from the day before. For example, maybe he actually ran 1 second faster himself the than he did yesterday but the other guy who won may have run that much faster.

As it relates to this concept of oppression. To me there are two perspectives on oppression, the gap analaysis version, and the philosophical ideal version.

The gap analysis version goes lack this:
Blacks are X amount behind whites, and therefore blacks are being oppressed because blacks should be the statistical equivalent of whites in these categories. In fact, this is how traditional reporting is done in the media.

The philosophical ideal version goes like this:
There is an ideal condition of freedom, the ability to create self-identity and the ability to move and interact freely (or something like that). If this ideal is reflected it does not necessarily mean that there will be statistical equality. If statistical equality occurs it doesn't necessarily mean we have met the philosophical ideal.

Oppression Ideas:
One is a statistical measurement, the other is a philosophical ideal.

Which idea do you think we should focus on in our fight against oppression?
Original Post
Your Binary choice should be rejected because there are no limits on how to fight oppressions. The statistical analysis of oppression are not simply about A is here and thus B should be here as well. Your dumbing down of what those statistical analysis really means only means you are trying to sell us an idea backed up with some shoddy reasoning.

Our self worth and ability to move is not measure in juxtaposition, however in this society a quick way to gauge our movements is in juxtaposition. These comparisons are not an attempt to be equal to or claim superiority to white folk, they are nothing more than logical arguments to demonstrate that something is wrong, which no one argues against, the arguing only begins when the finger of blame is brought to bare. What's to blame for the differences we see, is it that Black folks are really inferior to whites, or is white folk helping other white folk get ahead?
quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:

Which idea do you think we should focus on in our fight against oppression?


Neither. Instead of focusing on "ideas", there are hard, cold physical realities that exist in society that define - not gaps - but actual uneven treatment in our society. The obvious example is the way the law treats black men in America. There are both actual, systematic, legal obstructions to the vague notion of 'equal protection under the law' (like the disparity in crack vs. powder cocaine laws) as well as softer, social obstructions that are driven by prejudice, racism, biases etc.

Quantifying racism may be helpful in taking periodic note of progress, but I am much more in favor of addressing the factors that lead to the numbers than in just tracking statistics. As we all know, numbers are fudged all the time to tell whatever story someone wants to tell.
Why is rock vs. powder cocaine always seen as an example of disparity in justice?? They are NOT the same thing. Rock is intentionally made to be more powerfull, more addictive, it has proven to be more dangerous. Why shouldn't the sentencing be stiffer??
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:

Why is rock vs. powder cocaine always seen as an example of disparity in justice?? They are NOT the same thing. Rock is intentionally made to be more powerfull, more addictive, it has proven to be more dangerous. Why shouldn't the sentencing be stiffer??


Since when is "power" a factor in justice or sentencing length? Marijuana is illegal yet the far more "powerful" and destructive drugs of alcohol and nicotine are legal.
We are talking about two forms of the same substance. The marijuana vs alcohol does not apply they are different substances, one being legal one being illegal. Rock is intentionally processed to be stronger and more addictive. It is a more dangerous drug. Why should the penalty not be stiffer?? If assault somebody, I get in trouble. If I assault somebody with a deadly weapon......
quote:
Originally posted by Faheem:
Your Binary choice should be rejected because there are no limits on how to fight oppressions.

Faheem, at somepoint you have to have a conceptual framework to even DEFINE the problem. A simply example is this...

Faheem, define oppression for me...

Once you define it you conceptualize it, and create the opportunity to conceptualize ways of eliminating it. Stating that there are no 'limits' on ways to fight oppression is implying that oppression is infinite itself and I know you are not suggesting that.

quote:
The statistical analysis of oppression are not simply about A is here and thus B should be here as well. Your dumbing down of what those statistical analysis really means only means you are trying to sell us an idea backed up with some shoddy reasoning.


You offered no critique, you simply stated that statistical analysis is not. Is not what? I never said there was nothing behind the numbers, in fact, I argued the opposite. I encourage you to re-read the argument. And yes, you know as well as I that many look at disparity statistics as a metric for determining oppression or lack thereof. It is the ends evaluation of oppression. It is done in here on a routine basis as well as amongst street folks and intellectuals.

quote:
Our self worth and ability to move is not measure in juxtaposition, however in this society a quick way to gauge our movements is in juxtaposition.

Re-read what I said about the philosophical ideal. You are simply restating your argument with different words as the way I framed the philosophical ideal so you are not arguing against me. You are passively accepting the concept of a philosophical ideal that is not represented by statistical equality.

quote:
These comparisons are not an attempt to be equal to or claim superiority to white folk, they are nothing more than logical arguments to demonstrate that something is wrong, which no one argues against, the arguing only begins when the finger of blame is brought to bare. What's to blame for the differences we see, is it that Black folks are really inferior to whites, or is white folk helping other white folk get ahead?


1st some people do state nothing is wrong, but that is a different conversation. You are bringing something into the conversation here that is immaterial to the original post. I didn't interject fault, responsibility etc. That can be applied to either one of my Smile binary choices.
quote:
Neither. Instead of focusing on "ideas", there are hard, cold physical realities that exist in society that define - not gaps - but actual uneven treatment in our society. The obvious example is the way the law treats black men in America.There are both actual, systematic, legal obstructions to the vague notion of 'equal protection under the law' (like the disparity in crack vs. powder cocaine laws) as well as softer, social obstructions that are driven by prejudice, racism, biases etc.


And you are arguing exactly the opposite of Faheem. Uneven treatment equals what if it becomes even? Implicit in your argument as that 'soft' issues drive 'hard' issues and therefore deductive reason means that the elimination of unevens would indicate the elimination of soft issues. Hence you take the statistical approach even if you believe the statistics can be manipulated.
quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:

And you are arguing exactly the opposite of Faheem.


So what? Confused

quote:
Uneven treatment equals what if it becomes even?


When uneven treatment is no longer present then everyone in society is treated exactly the same and without regard to external factors. Black people are no longer subject to legal, social, societal, systemic etc. discrimination/oppression due to their race or color.

Was this a trick question? 16

quote:
Implicit in your argument as that 'soft' issues drive 'hard' issues and therefore deductive reason means that the elimination of unevens would indicate the elimination of soft issues. Hence you take the statistical approach even if you believe the statistics can be manipulated.


Your logic has left you brother. People are at the center of American society. People must change their thinking and behavior to eliminate discrimination and racism. Once people stop discriminating, then black people will stop experiencing the impact of discrimination.

Where is there any statistical analysis in that? In fact, by definition, statistics only track things - other things. Statistics in and of themselves are devoid of value.

By stressing statistics you inject an artificial means to a dialog about progress. I prefer to focus on what happens where the rubber hits the road as opposed to injecting an artificial layer between behavior and perception - which would be people endeavoring to create some kind of statistical analysis of things.

Why track a derivative measure of the problem when you can track the problem itself? It's like saying you want to track the stock market but all you look at is indexes and not the underlying stocks themselves. nono
quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:

The gap analysis version goes lack this:
Blacks are X amount behind whites, and therefore blacks are being oppressed because blacks should be the statistical equivalent of whites in these categories. In fact, this is how traditional reporting is done in the media
.



I find this to be an inadequate description of oppression, which is not a benign state which simply occurs in a vacuum, but rather, is asserted by a dominant group and thus the paradigm is faulty.


is that really Urbansun or some classmember who has borrowed his screen name and password to go around the board making multiple posts questioning the already established reality of white supremacy. Confused
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
Why is rock vs. powder cocaine always seen as an example of disparity in justice?? They are NOT the same thing. Rock is intentionally made to be more powerfull, more addictive, it has proven to be more dangerous. Why shouldn't the sentencing be stiffer??


off Myth Buster ...This is not true ... Rock is NOT more powerful or more addictive than powder. It is only cheaper and thus more accessible. Further, Rock is only more dangerous because of/depending on what it is cut with.

Okay ... Back on topic ...

quote:
Neither. Instead of focusing on "ideas", there are hard, cold physical realities that exist in society that define - not gaps - but actual uneven treatment in our society ...


yeah And more, there are hard, cold physical realities that exist in society that define the gaps as well.

It would seem that reality would dictate that before we get into such lofty discussions, i.e., philosophical ideals, we'd be better served eliminating the proven discrimination in housing and home financing [the tradition source of american wealth] and discrimination in employment/business financing [the source of income that contributes to establishing more wealth].

With those obstacles removed, I sincerely doubt we would even be having to discuss Gap Anaylsis.

[And might, after a generation or two, bear witness to the other folks having this discussion. Eek]discrimination in education [which
quote:
I find this to be an inadequate description of oppression

I find it to be a complete misrepresentation of so-called gap analysis stats. But then again, at no time did Dell/urbansun mention an actual stat that was supposed to be presented in this fashion:

Blacks are X amount behind whites, and therefore blacks are being oppressed

I find that to be complete bullshit. Stats on academic achievement gap, e.g., aren't used (by themselves) to draw the oppression conclusion as well as any number of other stat comparisons. At best, the stats are used as supporting evidence and NOT the evidence itself. Any reports that come close to indicating "oppression" with such stats comparisons are typically careful to state just that (i.e. how the stats don't mean X but may suggest X; further investigation or more information needed).

And still, the gap analysis aren't need to show oppression and even if all treatment was equal today there would still be "oppression" because of the unresolved oppression of yesteryear.

Oppression lives because the old oppression from the old order (segregation) was never slain. And, considering the kind of increase in wealth whites have continued to recoup from the housing market... (check for stats on the intergenerational wealth transfer of (white) baby boomers)... and it's clear to see that the old oppression didn't die, it multiplied.

Simply put, we don't need gap analysis comparisons to show that.

But then, too, regarding the criminal justice system, those stats undeniably show on-going oppression.
Negrospiritual, what I am attempting to do is go beyond the normative perception of white supremacy, and and develop different linguistic and metaphorical descriptions of the phenomenon to form different methods of attack.

How we frame something conditions how we respond.

I keep hearing folks say "that is not an adequate definition", that is not this, or that is not that, but which of you has of yet composed an appropriate umbrella definition of the term and how conceptually it is measured.

Nobody.

When you study transformative action in our community, in large part it is based on the redescription of concepts as a community and as individuals, hence creating the impetus for transformative action.

In short without the big words, we look and define the world differently and so react differently.

Since it seems so many folks start from the negative of "that is not right or flawed" I will give you same cats the opportunity to define oppression and how it is measured if it can be, or is it simply a matter of individuals perceptions of their existence in relation to others and other cultures.
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
We are talking about two forms of the same substance. The marijuana vs alcohol does not apply they are different substances, one being legal one being illegal. Rock is intentionally processed to be stronger and more addictive. It is a more dangerous drug. Why should the penalty not be stiffer?? If assault somebody, I get in trouble. If I assault somebody with a deadly weapon......




weapon versus no-weapon......not the same.....following your own logic you should say a .38 as opposed to a .44 magnum.........they are both guns....which should get one the same for an offense...just like crack versus powder.........
quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:

Negrospiritual, what I am attempting to do is go beyond the normative perception of white supremacy, and and develop different linguistic and metaphorical descriptions of the phenomenon to form different methods of attack.

You presume that current perceptions are somehow lacking. How so?

quote:
I keep hearing folks say "that is not an adequate definition", that is not this, or that is not that, but which of you has of yet composed an appropriate umbrella definition of the term and how conceptually it is measured.


Most people are quite clear about white supremacy. There's no crisis in understanding about the phenomenon is there?

quote:
When you study transformative action in our community, in large part it is based on the redescription of concepts as a community and as individuals, hence creating the impetus for transformative action.


You may be right, but I'd guess that the majority of times when people rise up in an effort to change their position in life, it has little to do with words and everything to do with just, plain, getting tired of the status quo adversely effecting them.

quote:
In short without the big words, we look and define the world differently and so react differently.


Huh? You presume that equivalent meaning cannot be communicated with different words. Of course we know it can. Now different ideas are another thing. But words themselves are . . . well . . . cheap. 15

quote:
Since it seems so many folks start from the negative of "that is not right or flawed" I will give you same cats the opportunity to define oppression and how it is measured if it can be, or is it simply a matter of individuals perceptions of their existence in relation to others and other cultures.


Certainly you're not suggesting that oppression is somehow a figment of our imagination are you?

Beyond that, there are a myriad of ways that disparity can be measured - from average net worth, to incarceration rates, to employment statistics, to poverty rates within our community, to the disproportionate incidence of disease in our community etc.

Beyond this, in your mind, what is the connection between how someone can define states in their lives to the actual states themselves? Someone's ability to articulate an experience has no - required - relationship to the experience itself. I don't follow your point here.

US - you seem to be trying to create some kind of rationalization for oppression. Either that - or you seem to be trying to convince people that what they think they are experiencing is not really what they are experiencing.

Wassup bruh? sck
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by urbansun:

Since it seems so many folks start from the negative of "that is not right or flawed" I will give you same cats the opportunity to define oppression and how it is measured if it can be, or is it simply a matter of individuals perceptions of their existence in relation to others and other cultures.


You cats? That's definitely not Dell. Smells more CF'ish.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

"Oppression in Context" Confused

What context? bang

MBM, thank you for saving me a lot of typing.
NSpirit, yes it is Dell. Typical, Dell and not the CON-Feeder.
The gap analysis version goes lack this:
Blacks are X amount behind whites, and therefore blacks are being oppressed because blacks should be the statistical equivalent of whites in these categories. In fact, this is how traditional reporting is done in the media.

The philosophical ideal version goes like this:
There is an ideal condition of freedom, the ability to create self-identity and the ability to move and interact freely (or something like that). If this ideal is reflected it does not necessarily mean that there will be statistical equality. If statistical equality occurs it doesn't necessarily mean we have met the philosophical ideal.

Oppression Ideas:
One is a statistical measurement, the other is a philosophical ideal.

Which idea do you think we should focus on in our fight against oppression?---urbansun

You're thinking.

That' good.

There is only one measure of oppression...does it or does it not exist.

The measure is in terms of the absolute.

It like being pregnant.

There is no almost pregnant.

To allow yourself to bet seduced into this thought process is really downhill reasoning.

If you have to develop a method of measure, you have it.

It is either there, or it isn't.


PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

"Oppression in Context" Confused

What context? bang


What "context" can explain oppression? Take your pick - any example of oppression.
MBM, I think Dell's intent and the way I took the title's meaning as an attempt to put Oppression "IN CONTEXT" as if to say that he wanted (us) to put it in "PERSPECTIVE." I think that's consistent with his belated (though still convoluted) disclosure here:

quote:
Negrospiritual, what I am attempting to do is go beyond the normative perception of white supremacy, and and develop different linguistic and metaphorical descriptions of the phenomenon to form different methods of attack.

How we frame something conditions how we respond...

In short without the big words, we look and define the world differently and so react differently.

It's obvious Dell confused and mixed in elements from his argument in his thread in the Religious forum and placed them here where they don't follow or match his initial, typically leading title-post (without adequate disclosure). Dell is caught in his own strawman imposed web where he tries to attack his opponents arguments (yours, for example) by claiming they (you) view WHITE SUPREMACY as ALL POWERFUL. His counter to that and the "perspective" or "context" he puts WHITE SUPREMACY in is one where WHITE SUPREMACY is powerless, because of the "choices" we have, if we only changed or redefined the way we look at it.

The problem with that is, in his zeal to motivate "transformative action" (that's the CON-Feeder slogan there, NSpirit), he exaggerates, perhaps purposely, about WHITE SUPREMACY and our perception of it and our ability to move and advance. It's as if he thinks that if we only view WHITE SUPREMACY as not powerful at all -- unless we give it power by our own choices -- then and only then will we move assertively towards that "philosophical ideal" and achieve parity/equality through that assertion of will.

To me, the crazy thing about his logic is (based on stuff he's said some time ago), Dell is fool enough to think we can "catch the other runner" like they are or at some time will be standing still.
quote:
There is only one measure of oppression...does it or does it not exist.

The measure is in terms of the absolute.

It like being pregnant.

There is no almost pregnant.

To allow yourself to bet seduced into this thought process is really downhill reasoning.

If you have to develop a method of measure, you have it.

It is either there, or it isn't.

tfro appl

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×