[core-questions]

> caging people you don't like or don't look like you

This is such a toxic, false statement. It denies reality: people are getting jailed for their actions. Due process is still in effect, you understand; and if anything, far fewer people are jailed than probably should be due to overcrowding, high costs, etc. Recidivism rates are very high.

Pretending that people are being jailed because of the color of their skin is ridiculous, especially considering that in many cities the jury, lawyers, judge, clerks, etc. are also of the same skin color. People are being jailed for committing crimes; and yes, these crimes are being disproportionately committed by some groups - as statistics have consistently shown for decades.

Statements like yours throw the entire justice system under the bus. You essentially call into question the entire appartatus that remains to protect normal folks in the burnt out husks of cities like Baltimore and Detroit.

> Karens' across the country feel that they need to control everyone and everything

Karen is an anti-white slur. "Karen" expects people to follow the rules and to be pro-social, and gets mad when they do not; this used to simply be good, mutual enforcement behaviour that everyone engaged in to keep people honest and to fight corruption. Stereotyping middleaged white women who simply want the process to be observed as written is offensive, and as sexist/racist as any other single term you could use these days.

[harshreality]

Both sides are true.

Police need to enforce the laws in economically depressed neighborhoods where crime, gangs, and drugs are much more common. However, police are also abusive in that environment, and the criminal justice system perpetuates economic and social hardship in those neighborhoods by disrupting good home/family environments.

Both forces — neighborhood criminality and an overly harsh criminal justice system — work against true social justice. One of the worst consequences is poor psychosocial development in children growing up in that environment (constant stress and fear, broken families, etc). For a somewhat anecdotal view of this sociological phenomenon, see Alice Goffman's book _On the Run_ (she's the daughter of Erving Goffman).

[bobcallme]

> Pretending that people are being jailed because of the color of their skin is ridiculous, especially considering that in many cities the jury, lawyers, judge, clerks, etc. are also of the same skin color.

That is not the point. People should not have to sit in a cage and then be "judged" by a system that is no longer blind and is stacked against anyone who goes through it. How long do you want to sit in a cage for "something you did not do"? It's no longer about "justice" or "reform", it's about revenge and benefiting those who make it up.

> Statements like yours throw the entire justice system under the bus. You essentially call into question the entire [apparatus] that remains to protect normal folks in the burnt out husks of cities like Baltimore and Detroit.

The system needs to be thrown out because of how it was created and what it has become. Instead of only being used to "reform" the most reprehensible individuals in society (violent crimes, theft, fraud), it has become a weapon for use against anyone the two parties did not like. First it was the racist Democrats who used it against those who did not look like them and then the fundie Republicans pushed it even further to use it as a tool for the things the church did not like. Many people sitting in jail right now should not be in jail because their "crimes" never affected anyone else or society at large.

> Karen is an anti-white slur. "Karen" expects people to follow the rules and to be pro-social

Being a cunt is not limited to any one group or ethnicity. "Karen" is applicable to any busybody who should mind their own business and leave people alone.

[_-david-_]

>"Karen" is applicable to any busybody who should mind their own business and leave people alone.

If there was a meme name for an angry woman would you have an issue if it was a predominantly black woman name? There is a sterotype of the angry black woman, so even if you would be fine it would immediately be called racist.

[kbelder]

Absolutely true. A lot of people have a severe blind spot, where they can only see certain types of racism.

I'm not that bent out of shape over 'Karen' as a slur, but the hypocrisy is annoying. It's like calling a geeky black guy an Urkel.

[core-questions]

> If there was a meme name for an angry woman would you have an issue if it was a predominantly black woman name?

This is a pretty ridiculous way of talking about this. Let's be concrete about it: if the name was "Shaniqua", we'd all know that it was intended to be insulting toward Black women, right? Are you implying I'd be okay with that one? I'm not.

"Karen" has evolved into being an anti-white slur, and I'm not okay with either option, nor any other slur of this sort. It degrades the conversation and makes it impossible to discuss actual problems that have highly predictable demographic correlations.

[_-david-_]

I either wasn't clear or you didn't read my post well. I agree with you. I think Karen is anti-white just like Shaniqua would be anti-black. I am against both.

[core-questions]

> People should not have to sit in a cage and then be "judged"

Reads like the words of someone who has never experienced life in a high-crime area. Likely, your sentiment about this is entirely created by false premises, an illusion from Hollywood about the nobility of gangsters. Life is not like that. Scary, sociopathic or even psychopathic people abound; violence is a daily fact of life; everyone has a mugging story.

The vast majority of these people sitting in cages have broken the law. Do you remember the law? The list of things you may not do, the list of things you will be punished for doing. A 2-year-old can understand this: do bad thing, sit in the corner as punishment. I'm not sure what happens in the brain of a mature adult to make them forget these basic mechanics; it really feels like you must have been sold sob stories that make your mushy heart over-empathize with a media construct. In reality, there are people out there who will stab you for $20.

> Many people sitting in jail right now should not be in jail because their "crimes" never affected anyone else or society at large.

There are certainly some such people, but have you looked at the 'revolving door' phenomenon where police arrest people who are punted back out onto the street hours or days later? They learn that there is no real lasting consequence for their actions besides an uncomfortable few nights (albeit, out of the rain and cold, and with free food). There are not that many people who end up in prison for crimes that don't affect others - and when they are in jail for a minimal offense, oftentimes that's the only thing that police and prosecutors could concretely nail them on, despite knowing or believing that they're involved in far worse actions that they haven't been caught for.

The other thing is, many actions do affect society at large. Drug use does; advocates for Legalizing Everything pretend otherwise, but opiates have a massive effect that cannot be mitigated just by making them legal. The addiction doesn't go away; the cost of the drugs doesn't disappear; and the actual impact of being a junkie doesn't stop. You don't end up all-of-a-sudden being able to hold down a job reliably just because your risk of arrest goes away. You don't remove chances for fentanyl to kill people by turning a blind eye to the problem.

> it has become a weapon for use against anyone the two parties did not like.

Guess what, Yank; these problems exist outside of your country and your two-party bubble bullshit too. Every major city in the world faces these problems, in predictably direct proportions to demographic factors that may not be politely discussed. The problem is endemic, it's not a function of the system except to the extent that the system finds ways to profit off of corruption and drug money.

[gugagore]

> Pretending that people are being jailed because of the color of their skin is ridiculous, especially considering that in many cities the jury, lawyers, judge, clerks, etc. are also of the same skin color.

The extremely abbreviated way to make this point is to say "racism is over because Obama, and Kamala, and black faces in high places".

[core-questions]

No, you're stuck at some kind of 2008 view on the topic.

The conclusion here is actually "these things are not caused by racism, because you can completely remove white people from the equation and yet the situation only ever gets worse".

Social policies combined with demographic realities are the proximate causes here. Continuing to paper over the latter with the former just entrenches the issue generationally.

[gugagore]

What evidence do you have for "these things are not caused by racism, because you can completely remove white people from the equation and yet the situation only ever gets worse"?

"see what happens when white people are completely removed from the equation" is not an experiment that is possible to run.

So, no, you can't empirically do what you're saying you can do.

If you have a thought experiment or an approximation in mind, do share.

Here's a thought experiment: every judge, lawyer, jury member, and police officer is now black. If you think that is akin to white people disappearing, then we disagree. e.g. who wrote the laws? who stands to profit the most from incarceration?

It's called "systemic" racism for a reason.