And in how many out of those 90% is color an important or even the deciding factor for the killing?

But black-on-black is simply a different story than white police-black-unarmed-guy. You're again comparing apples and oranges.

Are you trying to justify the policemen's actions or what is it you're trying to say here?

Also, they haven't protested and rioted to this extent in a very long time. It is fkng disturbing, but what can one expect in the context of a "government" that is openly racist and promotes white supremacy as well as violence in response to violence. No wonder people go off the deep end. It's been a long way coming.

No. In fact, I previously wrote specifically thay i'm not excusing or justifying the police response.

I'm just pointing out what I find hypocritical about the protest/riots that occurred afterwards.

Maybe the protests are justified but not the looting and the violence.

That society is reaping what it has sown. Hatred, divisiveness and inequality.

It deliberately plays with racism as a political tool (Russophobia, Sinophobia, sh*t hole countries etc.), praises destructive rioters in non-allied countries and gloats at its destabilising influence on those societies. Yet, in places, it has a 3rd world standard of justice, poverty and health care.

At least if it implodes, as it appears to be doing, it will be less focussed on spreading misery for the rest of the planet.

Okay. Fair enough.

The question for me is what alternatives there are - with that I mean the protests, not the looting (which can’t be excused). For whatever reason this particular incident triggered this massive reaction (I’m sure it’s a combination of many things, both economic and political), there is a deeper underlying issue and apparently, not enough progress has been made.

I found this book quite good in case anyone’s interested https://www.amazon.com/Stamped-Begin.../dp/1568585985

Well yes, if the protests are instigated by other individuals whose goal is to divide and distract.

Am in agreement here.

On the last point: the question - and it’s a big and partly philosophical one - is whether the world can exist without what’s essentially a hegemonic power. The US may not want to explicitly play that role anymore and hasn’t wanted to for a while. But without it, what would happen? I agree they are dangerously close to imploding, if you consider both the looming economic disaster together with this massive level of tension which will inevitably increase once recession fully hits. But what could be the alternative?

The white supremacists have finally learned to embrace diversity.

Thanks, I just ordered copy. I have a black friend who told me she doesn't understand racism although she experiences it daily, she just asked me "what do you see when you look at a black person ?"

So when a black person kills a black person, you think it's an issue that has to do with their race. But when a white person kills a white person, it has nothing to do with their race?

You're essentially saying that black-on-black crime makes black people responsible and is something they need to address but that when there is white-on-white crime, it has nothing to do with race and is not something that white people should feel responsible for addressing.

Racism manifests in various ways. That's one of them. You're basically implying that black people need to be accountable for the actions of their own race but that white people do not need to be accountable for the actions of their own race.

The world won’t lose much when the Americans stop playing world police. Most third world countries have experienced two or three outside powers taking advantage of their people and resources... and are far less afraid to deal with China than Trump is. America has a lot more to lose than the rest of the world.

It’s fascinating to see how the white Americans who were punching each other over toilet paper a few weeks ago are “shocked” about the riots and calling for the army to move in.

Tom likes to groan at me today.

It's Sunday.

Tom

In that case China will rush in to fill the vacuum and become a hyperpower, maybe to a lesser extent with Russia, India and Brazil as local superpowers.
Countries all over the world are already turning away from the US and looking to China to take over the role that the US has occupied since the post war period all through the Cold war.
I would almost say that the US and the CCCP needed each other for their reason of being and the end of the Soviet Union meant the end of the US empire. What we are seeing now in the last flickering of America lashing out at everybody while slowly being eaten away from the inside.
History is repeating it´s self and we know that Empires usually don´t end with a bang but with a whimper.

__________________
Back in Bavaria, god´s own belly button.

Causation vs correlation?

It seems to me that having access to a good lawyer (and the money to settle, where available) may be the predominant factor here. As a consequence the poor would get sentenced more often, and for longer, than their well-off or rich counterparts. An extreme case is Ethan Couch, a Texan who walked free after killing four people driving drunk due to suffering from what his lawyers termed "affluenza".

Given the socioeconomic realities, this could mean that black people are treated roughly the same as the whites in a comparable situation, but because poor whites are a smaller subset of their racial group than poor blacks, the racial average may look like blacks get handled more heavy-handed than whites although, in such a scenario, that's not necessarily the (main or only) reason.

It sure looks like the US judicial system disadvantages blacks. But sometimes looks are deceiving, at least in part.

I see this mostly the same way. I don't necessarily agree that countries are looking towards China, though - they may turn away from the US, but don't really turn to anything else either (other than themselves of course - nationalism certainly is on the rise). Personally, there are too many issues in China that my politically liberal self cannot possibly condone. Militarily, they can't keep up, so I'm not sure they'll grab that power while we're all still around and arguably, it is the most important form of power. I wonder if it's possible for the world to exist in the absence of any superpower/empire-type power.

It's a tough read in some ways, but I hope you will find it insightful.

What did you respond to that question?

I found it a very interesting question, I didn't respond yet, I decided to share the question here.

data? and what is the "much bigger problem" as you see it?

China doesn´t really need to keep up militarily, for instance the US is pouring over a trillion dollars into the military each and every year, and that is not counting the nuclear systems, they are on the payroll of the department of energy. China won´t go that way, why should they, I´ll bet they are speculating that the US will tear it´s self apart, also there is no left over impetus from the rivalry between the US and the CCCP. They have no "military industrial complex" sucking money out of the system to feed the share holder value.
Having said that they are catching up in many ways other than the brute force of the US.
But, in my opinion, one of the main reasons that China will take over and that countries will increasingly turn to China is that they are giving out their aid and making deals without demanding that the recipients bother with pesky human rights and democracy issues.

__________________
Back in Bavaria, god´s own belly button.