Reparations for black Americans (1 Viewer)

[Yenrub]

Subsidies cool?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'd agree Joe if I didn't spend copious amounts of time trying to convey to people real life examples of the things listed in that very article.  Almost all those things I have discussed in specificity on this board over the years and most recently any time white privilege has been discussed.  So, that's not been the only answer.  Of course, those comments and experiences were dismissed because they didn't fit a narrative (if they were even acknowledged at all).  I have no control over that.  All I can do is continue to point out experiences and articles like the above and encourage people to get engaged with the various need groups in their communities.  Until people expose themselves to real life situations like that, they aren't going to change their minds.  They don't want to change their minds and I am certainly not capable of changing a mind, none of us are.  But we CAN stand up to misconceptions, bad research and flat out false information and that's sort of what I've resigned myself to on topics like this.





3

Thanks @The Commish  I don't think I was clear. (ironic given my point). I'm not doubting you spend time talking to people about it. Effort or desire doesn't seem to be the issue. My point was the issue seems to be an unclear message or focus.

BUT only if you have a clear message. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

And one more thought - It's 100% the responsibility of the person doing the communication to be clear.

I hate seeing people fail at communicating a message and then blame the audience. Usually the excuse is something like "they're too stupid / racist / old / biased / ignorant to understand". That way the communicator can walk away feeling superior. In a great many cases, the reality is the communicator failed to make a clear and compelling case they could understand. 

 

[The Commish]

Thanks @The Commish  I don't think I was clear. (ironic given my point). I'm not doubting you spend time talking to people about it. Effort or desire doesn't seem to be the issue. My point was the issue seems to be an unclear message or focus.

BUT only if you have a clear message. 

And one more thought - It's 100% the responsibility of the person doing the communication to be clear.

I hate seeing people fail at communicating a message and then blame the audience. Usually the excuse is something like "they're too stupid / racist / old / biased / ignorant to understand". That way the communicator can walk away feeling superior. In a great many cases, the reality is the communicator failed to make a clear and compelling case they could understand. 

Agree 100% which is why I often rely on the studies and research by others to show the realities we live in.  I too am one that preaches that there are two components of a conversation.  I get that.  WIth this particular topic though there is a HUGE effort to resist what is sitting right in front of us.  It is an incredibly storied problem that goes back to the beginning of this country (and before), but not very complex.  The complexity is rooted in getting it unwoven from society but we can't begin to tackle that until we first acknowledge it exists and then understand how it manifests itself in today's world.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

And one more thought - It's 100% the responsibility of the person doing the communication to be clear.

It's 100% the responsibility of the writer to be clear; but once the writer has fulfilled that obligation, it's 100% the reader's responsibility to read what the writer wrote and not assume a bunch of stuff that wasn't said.

There's such a thing as sloppy writing. There's also such a thing as sloppy reading. Both should be avoided.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It's 100% the responsibility of the writer to be clear; but once the writer has fulfilled that obligation, it's 100% the reader's responsibility to read what the writer wrote and not assume a bunch of stuff that wasn't said.

There's such a thing as sloppy writing. There's also such a thing as sloppy reading. Both should be avoided.

I believe there are exceptions of course. But the listener is the one that gets to decide if the writer has fulfilled that obligation in my opinion. 

 

[The Commish]

I believe there are exceptions of course. But the listener is the one that gets to decide if the writer has fulfilled that obligation in my opinion. 

There comes a point where unless one is an expert on a subject, it should be acceptable for the writer to draw a line and recommend the reader consult other sources if what is being consumed by the reader isn't sufficient.  And I'd suggest that "there are exceptions" isn't really the correct read of this forum.  I'd say it's a 50/50 shot that the problem does ultimately land in the reception.  It's disingenuous to suggest I, or you or anyone else could MAKE someone understand something which is how the above reads.  That simply isn't reality IMO.

 

[Redwes25]

Here it is: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/361631/

Really worth a read if you want to speak intelligently about this subject. 

Great article. Thanks for posting it.

 

[Joe Bryant]

There comes a point where unless one is an expert on a subject, it should be acceptable for the writer to draw a line and recommend the reader consult other sources if what is being consumed by the reader isn't sufficient.  And I'd suggest that "there are exceptions" isn't really the correct read of this forum.  I'd say it's a 50/50 shot that the problem does ultimately land in the reception.  It's disingenuous to suggest I, or you or anyone else could MAKE someone understand something which is how the above reads.  That simply isn't reality IMO.

Of course, you can't make people understand. I'm saying if they don't understand, that's on you. And I know that's not how most people think. But I believe it's the way things work. 

I see a lot of exceptionally smart people who can't get their message across. And I often see them  and do the "Guess they're just not smart enough to understand". 

When the practical reality is: You didn't get your message across. 

Our last election was one of many points. 

Jeb Bush was extremely qualified to be President. Governor, family experience, author and extremely versed in issues like Immigration and Education. 

Obviously, there were a ton of other factors in play. But if you ask anyone, "What was Jeb Bush's promise for America?", you will get crickets.

If you ask anyone, "Regardless of how it's turned out, what was Donald Trump's promise for America?", everyone can answer Make America Great Again. 

He got his message across.

Obviously, this isn't about the quality of the message. It's about the quality of the communicator. Some of the best messages are lost because they weren't communicated clearly. 

 

[The Commish]

Of course, you can't make people understand. I'm saying if they don't understand, that's on you. And I know that's not how most people think. But I believe it's the way things work. 

I see a lot of exceptionally smart people who can't get their message across. And I often see them  and do the "Guess they're just not smart enough to understand". 

When the practical reality is: You didn't get your message across. 

Our last election was one of many points. 

Jeb Bush was extremely qualified to be President. Governor, family experience, author and extremely versed in issues like Immigration and Education. 

Obviously, there were a ton of other factors in play. But if you ask anyone, "What was Jeb Bush's promise for America?", you will get crickets.

If you ask anyone, "Regardless of how it's turned out, what was Donald Trump's promise for America?", everyone can answer Make America Great Again. 

He got his message across.

Obviously, this isn't about the quality of the message. It's about the quality of the communicator. Some of the best messages are lost because they weren't communicated clearly. 

Seems we are talking about significantly different types of "message" here.  I didn't get that initially.  I'm talking about something completely different as it relates specifically to this board and a good number of us posters and how we interact with each other.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Seems we are talking about significantly different types of "message" here.  I didn't get that initially.  I'm talking about something completely different as it relates specifically to this board and a good number of us posters and how we interact with each other.

Yes. I'm talking way beyond this forum. 

My biggest point is when someone asks, "Can you tell me the main point?" or in today's world, "Can you give me the TLR version?" (because that's how people operate), it's not a good thing if the answer is "It's complicated. Read the really long article". 

I'm NOT saying that's not true. 

I'm saying that's not the way messages or movements are spread. 

 

[zftcg]

Yes. I'm talking way beyond this forum. 

My biggest point is when someone asks, "Can you tell me the main point?" or in today's world, "Can you give me the TLR version?" (because that's how people operate), it's not a good thing if the answer is "It's complicated. Read the really long article". 

I'm NOT saying that's not true. 

I'm saying that's not the way messages or movements are spread. 

Generally speaking, I'd agree with you. In this case, it's particularly hard to do because a) reparations is a really difficult issue and b) as well-written as Coates' piece is, it punts on the issue that many people wonder about, which is how to actually go about implementing reparations.

But if I had to summarize the article (keeping in mind it's been a few years since I read it), it would be this: The case for reparations rests not just on slavery but on the continuing legacy of slavery, as seen in Jim Crow, redlining and other practices, some of which continue to this day.

But even seeing those words highlights why everyone is encouraging people to read the whole thing, because my quickie summary can't do his argument justice.

 

[The Commish]

Yes. I'm talking way beyond this forum. 

My biggest point is when someone asks, "Can you tell me the main point?" or in today's world, "Can you give me the TLR version?" (because that's how people operate), it's not a good thing if the answer is "It's complicated. Read the really long article". 

I'm NOT saying that's not true. 

I'm saying that's not the way messages or movements are spread. 

I follow now

Though, I will say, when someone asks this question of me, I don't normally comply simply because I think this "soundbyte" world we live in today is one of the biggest reasons we have communication and knowledge gaps in this country.  I don't want to be part of spreading THAT KIND of message.  I am happy to walk people through complicated things if they are showing a willingness to have good faith discussion and appear to be genuine in their questions.  But if all they are after is the 10,000 foot level when they need to be down in the weeds to fully understand, I'm not their guy.

 

[zftcg]

I follow now

Though, I will say, when someone asks this question of me, I don't normally comply simply because I think this "soundbyte" world we live in today is one of the biggest reasons we have communication and knowledge gaps in this country.  I don't want to be part of spreading THAT KIND of message.  I am happy to walk people through complicated things if they are showing a willingness to have good faith discussion and appear to be genuine in their questions.  But if all they are after is the 10,000 foot level when they need to be down in the weeds to fully understand, I'm not their guy.

I get where you're coming from, but I actually think that in our information-saturated age, it's more important than ever to be able to summarize things effectively. My eight-year-old has a periodic assignment from school where he has to read an article and then write a summary. It's always a huge struggle for him, but I tell him that he will look back on this assignment one day and be glad his teacher made him do it, because it's such a valuable skill to develop.

 

[The Commish]

I get where you're coming from, but I actually think that in our information-saturated age, it's more important than ever to be able to summarize things effectively. My eight-year-old has a periodic assignment from school where he has to read an article and then write a summary. It's always a huge struggle for him, but I tell him that he will look back on this assignment one day and be glad his teacher made him do it, because it's such a valuable skill to develop.

I'm all for it, where it's appropriate.  I should have qualified that above.  But reality is, there are some things where it's completely inappropriate and only sets back the passing of useful knowledge accurately.  To me, accuracy will always trump expediency.  I guess this is one of my "get off my lawn" things  

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'm all for it, where it's appropriate.  I should have qualified that above.  But reality is, there are some things where it's completely inappropriate and only sets back the passing of useful knowledge accurately.  To me, accuracy will always trump expediency.  I guess this is one of my "get off my lawn" things  

I agree with all this. But I think for me, it still boils down to the "bottom line". I get it that Jeb Bush didn't want to "dumb down" his views on immigration or education.

It's a basic thing for human nature - people mostly gravitate toward clarity and almost never toward confusion. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I agree with all this. But I think for me, it still boils down to the "bottom line". I get it that Jeb Bush didn't want to "dumb down" his views on immigration or education. I think a lot of people wish he'd been more clear and therefore appealing. 

I believe it's a basic thing for human nature - people almost always gravitate toward clarity and almost never toward confusion. 




1




 





 

 

[[scooter]]

"Found 1 error in text"?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

"Found 1 error in text"?

It's from a browser extension that checks spelling and grammar and gives a lot of false positives, so the numbers don't necessarily mean anything. In that case, though, I suspect it's the period outside the closing quotation mark.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Somewhat relevant to the issue of reparations:

Several insights emerge from our field experiment. First, apologies are not a panacea: the efficacy of an apology and whether it may backfire depend on how the apology is made. Second, across treatments, money speaks louder than words – the best form of apology is to include a coupon for a future trip. Third, in some cases sending an apology is worse than sending nothing at all, particularly for repeated apologies.

 

[NCCommish]

Seems like Coates is more talking about something like South Africa did with its Truth Commission not payments. An admission of guilt and moving forward understanding that admission must bring tangible change. That seems doable. There is no way to cut a check it's just unworkable. What we can do is legislate changes, like postal banking, that make a difference and start to change things.

 

[GROOT]

I have the solution to the reparations issue. Just check a donate box when you fill out your taxes. If you are for it, put your money in the pot.