Memphis Police Killing

[GobbleDog 816]

7 hours ago, peenie said:

I was at a Mexican restaurant getting drinks at the bar (wait was 45 mins. for a table). There was a sloppy line but the Mexican bartender wouldn’t pick me even though I had been waiting and it was clearly my turn. She just kept picking around me even though I was directly in front of her with no one in front of me.

Ever see an investigative report trying to race bait... "This video shows a black woman getting worse service than a white woman at a jewelry store, even though they're dressed the same.  Must be racism!!!"

Never mind that if an oil sheik walked in he'd get the best service. Does the jewelry store owner love Muslims or hate white people?

Obviously the real answer is people's perception of who's going to spend the most money. Blacks are notoriously poor/cheap and therefore get worse service. If blacks were notoriously rich/generous, I guarantee they'd get the best service. But the level of service has nothing to do with liking/disliking races.

You're honest and smart enough to admit that's true... i hope.

[dogcows 1,029]

12 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Blacks are notoriously poor/cheap

Racist

[Hardcore troubadour 12,626]

2 hours ago, dogcows said:

The police departments we have today are directly descended from slave patrols. The point of which was specifically to target black people… not Asians or Indians/Pakistanis. The only race ever to be considered property solely based on their race: black people. That history might give you an insight into this. Sure, there is a certain level of racism against Asians and south Asians and South Americans. But it’s quite different than the racism against black people.

Lie

[craftsman 1,045]

4 hours ago, dogcows said:

Racist

dogcow adopted a baby with his boyfriend and the baby's first word was..."r..r....ra....rac....racist". They were two proud liberal papas.  

[peenie 1,690]

6 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

Ever see an investigative report trying to race bait... "This video shows a black woman getting worse service than a white woman at a jewelry store, even though they're dressed the same.  Must be racism!!!"

Never mind that if an oil sheik walked in he'd get the best service. Does the jewelry store owner love Muslims or hate white people?

Obviously the real answer is people's perception of who's going to spend the most money. Blacks are notoriously poor/cheap and therefore get worse service. If blacks were notoriously rich/generous, I guarantee they'd get the best service. But the level of service has nothing to do with liking/disliking races.

You're honest and smart enough to admit that's true... i hope.

What you’re saying is that I got passed over because of her prior experience dealing with difficult black people, especially black women. That could be true. 

Thus creating a self fulfilling prophecy because she gave poor service I might not have given a tip. However, I try not to reinforce negative stereotypes and if she made the drink and handed it to me, that’s good enough to deserve $1 per drink. 

[TimHauck 1,799]

17 hours ago, dogcows said:

Just pick your favorite definition from the urban dictionary.

I mean, not for nothing but he pretty much defined it:

17 hours ago, jerryskids said:

it derives from the sum total life experiences of the officers in question, both from personal and professional experiences.

So what others call racism I would call "bias and/or profiling based on prior experiences."  

Maybe it’s the r-word that people don’t like, but it’s stereotyping.  Just because it’s “often right and based on statistics,” it’s not going to be right all the time, and that’s why blacks are pretty much at an inherent disadvantage in almost everything in life (except sports).

[TimHauck 1,799]

15 hours ago, Voltaire said:

Why has the "systemically racist" system been filled soup-to-nuts with people of various ethnicities who have goodwill on issues of race to include affirmative supporters, but not any shred of racism has been found?  You'd think that after sixty years of effort across generations, all of these dedicated people would have actually found something systemically racist to eradicate.

Wait what? This can’t be a serious post.  Are you claiming there hasn’t been proven to be any systemic racism even going back 60 YEARS???

[Voltaire 4,556]

52 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Wait what? This can’t be a serious post.  Are you claiming there hasn’t been proven to be any systemic racism even going back 60 YEARS???

"Systemic Racism" is an amorphous term but the way the other Tim uses it that got everyone riled up, it is that the institutions and government of the United States today remain racist because the country has had a tragic history on race before most all of us were born. If I have that wrong, someone, maybe you, can free to come up with a better one. Rather than actually showing or discussing how things are "systemically racist", he recommends two books he knows that I have no time, desire nor intention to read, while refusing to explain what he learned from those books.

And yes, systemic racism ended with Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but give it another 10-15 years or so for the court cases and relevant state laws to catch up and start to be fully implemented. I'm pretty aware of anything from the late 80s onward if you don't mind giving me a twenty year grace period. 

I think "systemic racism" is a noun + a verb + some sh*t that ended 60 years ago.

[Mike Hunt 153]

9 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

Ever see an investigative report trying to race bait... "This video shows a black woman getting worse service than a white woman at a jewelry store, even though they're dressed the same.  Must be racism!!!"

Never mind that if an oil sheik walked in he'd get the best service. Does the jewelry store owner love Muslims or hate white people?

Obviously the real answer is people's perception of who's going to spend the most money. Blacks are notoriously poor/cheap and therefore get worse service. If blacks were notoriously rich/generous, I guarantee they'd get the best service. But the level of service has nothing to do with liking/disliking races.

You're honest and smart enough to admit that's true... i hope.

The bad tipping rap at restaurants in fact has hurt service for blacks.

I was in the business while in college and the black servers did not want to wait on a table of black people. There are good and bad tippers of every race but the blacks in general were the worst tipping culture with black women being worse than the men.  One party of black women had a 194.00 tab and left a 6 buck tip, and that was to a black server.  The server came back in the kitchen and blew up.

[craftsman 1,045]

9 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

The bad tipping rap at restaurants in fact has hurt service for blacks.

I was in the business while in college and the black servers did not want to wait on a table of black people. There are good and bad tippers of every race but the blacks in general were the worst tipping culture with black women being worse than the men.  One party of black women had a 194.00 tab and left a 6 buck tip, and that was to a black server.  The server came back in the kitchen and blew up.

I've been there myself and this is 100% true. But I guess, just like the black cops in Memphis beating up the black guy, this too must be systemic racism only in the restaurant industry affecting the black employees to themselves be racist against black customers. 

And it's not just that they tip notoriously bad in general, they also take up all your time and are always in need of something. And always one at a time do they need something. 

 

[TimHauck 1,799]

1 hour ago, Voltaire said:

"Systemic Racism" is an amorphous term but the way the other Tim uses it that got everyone riled up, it is that the institutions and government of the United States today remain racist because the country has had a tragic history on race before most all of us were born. If I have that wrong, someone, maybe you, can free to come up with a better one. Rather than actually showing or discussing how things are "systemically racist", he recommends two books he knows that I have no time, desire nor intention to read, while refusing to explain what he learned from those books.

And yes, systemic racism ended with Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but give it another 10-15 years or so for the court cases and relevant state laws to catch up and start to be fully implemented. I'm pretty aware of anything from the late 80s onward if you don't mind giving me a twenty year grace period. 

I think "systemic racism" is a noun + a verb + some sh*t that ended 60 years ago.

Here are 3 example of banks settling as a result of redlining between 2008-2013:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-28/eight-recent-cases-that-show-redlining-is-still-alive-and-evolving

 

And here is an article detailing discrimination against black farmers as recently as 2011 (scroll down to the section called “the house that Jamie built” for the specific examples):

https://newrepublic.com/article/166276/black-farm-land-lost-20th-century-billions

[peenie 1,690]

I take back every single thing I’ve said. Police just need better training on how to deal with the adrenaline and anxiety and tensions of making arrests. If this man didn’t get a beat down, no one should:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cn-y56XDwoo/?igshid=Zjc2ZTc4Nzk=

Proud of how our police handled that situation. (Or it could just further prove I’m right in that restraint is shown for white suspects if the the apprehended suspect is indeed white.)

[lod001 1,237]

On 1/27/2023 at 8:14 PM, The Real timschochet said:

Guess I’m worse then. This sort of treatment doesn’t happen to white people in this country. 

Yeah sometimes the white guy never even has a chance. He just gets murdered trying to give up. 

 

[peenie 1,690]

I wonder why these police officers weren’t called heroes? Where are their GoFundMe accounts? 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,626]

21 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Yeah sometimes the white guy never even has a chance. He just gets murdered trying to give up. 

 

So much worse than any other video. Crickets. 

[Patented Phil 823]

11 minutes ago, peenie said:

I wonder why these police officers weren’t called heroes? Where are their GoFundMe accounts? 

I wonder when you’re going to stop making this an evil-whitey issue. 

[TimHauck 1,799]

25 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Yeah sometimes the white guy never even has a chance. He just gets murdered trying to give up. 

 

I already brought this one up earlier 

[TimHauck 1,799]

I mean if we’re OK with stereotypes, I think it’s fair to say a lot of cops are bullies.   It’s not about whether they’re black or white, but it’s not uncommon for them to abuse their power.

[peenie 1,690]

5 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

I wonder when you’re going to stop making this an evil-whitey issue. 

First of all, I’m adding fuel to this non-story. If it wasn’t for me this thread would’ve died pages ago. 

[Patented Phil 823]

The 5 officers - black

Police Chief - black female

Memphis Demographics - 65% black

Memphis Government - one Republican in last 56 years

Liberal Response - cuz racism

[Fireballer 2,379]

20 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I mean if we’re OK with stereotypes, I think it’s fair to say a lot of cops are bullies.   It’s not about whether they’re black or white, but it’s not uncommon for them to abuse their power.

I’ve been on the street and trained with a lot of cops...hundreds and maybe thousands. Some cops are indiscriminate flaming a$$holes. The job breeds it, I believe. 

[jonnyutah 122]

37 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

I’ve been on the street and trained with a lot of cops...hundreds and maybe thousands. Some cops are indiscriminate flaming a$$holes. The job breeds it, I believe. 

Of course it breeds it. Whiny turds at Starbucks get upset when they have to make a custom drink. 

How could we possibly expect people that have to deal with several sacks of crap every day to not start hating their clientele?

 

[Baker Boy 1,484]

20 hours ago, peenie said:

The problem is not single mother households but rather father abandoned households. Ugh! I hate him.

The problem is single mother households, and the cause is fathers abandoning households.

[Dizkneelande 839]

I found a video of squistion 

 

[The Real timschochet 2,925]

2 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Here are 3 example of banks settling as a result of redlining between 2008-2013:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-28/eight-recent-cases-that-show-redlining-is-still-alive-and-evolving

 

And here is an article detailing discrimination against black farmers as recently as 2011 (scroll down to the section called “the house that Jamie built” for the specific examples):

https://newrepublic.com/article/166276/black-farm-land-lost-20th-century-billions

Oops. 
 

Voltaire is well meaning enough. And he could make a real point by arguing that the 1964 Civil Rights Act ushered in significant change in this country, made things far better now than they were then, and many radical activists will not acknowledge this, which weakens their position: that’s a legitimate argument with plenty of merit. 
 

But Voltaire goes too far. He claims there is NO systemic racism left in our society. That is demonstrably untrue, and its assertion makes Voltaire look as bad, or even worse, than the radical activists on the other side who argue that nothing has changed. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,626]

On 1/27/2023 at 9:32 PM, The Real timschochet said:

How come everytime police reform is proposed in this country, like the George Floyd Act, Republicans shoot it down? 

Becase we have all seen what the dopey leftists offer up as solutions . Like defund the police and no cash bail and “violence interruptors”. They don’t know what they are doing and should be dismissed. And the left can’t be trusted. The slippery slope is real. 

[peenie 1,690]

1 hour ago, Baker Boy said:

The problem is single mother households, and the cause is fathers abandoning households.

If a soldier loses his leg after stepping on a mine, the fault of him not being able bodied is not his crutches! 
Mothers are the saviors of the black family not the destroyers. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,626]

Just now, peenie said:

If a soldier loses his leg after stepping on a mine, the fault of him not being able bodied is not his crutches! 
Mothers are the saviors of the black family not the destroyers. 

Agree. But we live in a shameless society and men of all stripes are not called out for abandoning their family. It should be a great source of shame. 

[Fireballer 2,379]

1 minute ago, peenie said:

If a soldier loses his leg after stepping on a mine, the fault of him not being able bodied is not his crutches! 
Mothers are the saviors of the black family not the destroyers. 

I’d have to find it, but I was reading the other day that single father black households produce kids that have a higher rate of graduation and staying out of jail.

[5-Points 2,726]

6 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Wait what? This can’t be a serious post.  Are you claiming there hasn’t been proven to be any systemic racism even going back 60 YEARS???

That would be silly. Affirmative Action has been around within the last 60 years. 

[5-Points 2,726]

7 minutes ago, peenie said:

Mothers are the saviors of the black family not the destroyers. 

 

 

You mean Grandmothers, right?

[Strike 3,957]

3 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

I’d have to find it, but I was reading the other day that single father black households produce kids that have a higher rate of graduation and staying out of jail.

Well duh.  I was watching this documentary, "Boyz n the Hood", that follows a few black youth.  One is from a single father household and the other two are from a single mother household.  The youth from the single father household graduates high school and goes on to college.  Of the two boys from the single mother household, one becomes a drug dealer and spends time in jail, and the other is murdered. 

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

10 minutes ago, Strike said:

Well duh.  I was watching this documentary, "Boyz n the Hood", that follows a few black youth.  One is from a single father household and the other two are from a single mother household.  The youth from the single father household graduates high school and goes on to college.  Of the two boys from the single mother household, one becomes a drug dealer and spends time in jail, and the other is murdered. 

Yep, I saw that documentary too. And the guy who died? Left behind a son without a father. Cycle of the hood life. 

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

5 hours ago, Mike Hunt said:

The bad tipping rap at restaurants in fact has hurt service for blacks.

I was in the business while in college and the black servers did not want to wait on a table of black people. There are good and bad tippers of every race but the blacks in general were the worst tipping culture with black women being worse than the men.  One party of black women had a 194.00 tab and left a 6 buck tip, and that was to a black server.  The server came back in the kitchen and blew up.

I too can confirm this from my experience. However, I did get my biggest and best tip from a black guy on a date. Was he drug dealer? Probably 

[Alias Detective 1,179]

5 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

I too can confirm this from my experience. However, I did get my biggest and best tip from a black guy on a date. Was he drug dealer? Probably 

Just the big best tip?

[jerryskids 5,191]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Here are 3 example of banks settling as a result of redlining between 2008-2013:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-28/eight-recent-cases-that-show-redlining-is-still-alive-and-evolving

 

And here is an article detailing discrimination against black farmers as recently as 2011 (scroll down to the section called “the house that Jamie built” for the specific examples):

https://newrepublic.com/article/166276/black-farm-land-lost-20th-century-billions

 

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Oops. 
 

Voltaire is well meaning enough. And he could make a real point by arguing that the 1964 Civil Rights Act ushered in significant change in this country, made things far better now than they were then, and many radical activists will not acknowledge this, which weakens their position: that’s a legitimate argument with plenty of merit. 
 

But Voltaire goes too far. He claims there is NO systemic racism left in our society. That is demonstrably untrue, and its assertion makes Voltaire look as bad, or even worse, than the radical activists on the other side who argue that nothing has changed. 

I hesitate to speak for Volty, but I don't think he is saying no company ever does such things, but rather that it is illegal to do such things, hence the lawsuits and penalties.

About 15 years ago my son went to school (private school, most parents were well off) with the son of a former NFL linebacker, both black.  One day we learned that they were moving to Laveen, a community/city about 30-40 minutes away.  When I asked why, the dad simply said "that's where all of the black people live." It's a perfectly normal neighborhood, middle class, and I was oblivious to this.  I'm confident that some amount of redlining led to black people being concentrated there in the past.  But by this point, it was merely (mostly?) a place with a concentration of black people, and black people chose to live there to be near their own people.  These days, with the explosive growth of Phoenix and fairly good location of Laveen to the downtown area, people of all persuasions are moving there.  

[Voltaire 4,556]

4 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Here are 3 example of banks settling as a result of redlining between 2008-2013:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-28/eight-recent-cases-that-show-redlining-is-still-alive-and-evolving

 

And here is an article detailing discrimination against black farmers as recently as 2011 (scroll down to the section called “the house that Jamie built” for the specific examples):

https://newrepublic.com/article/166276/black-farm-land-lost-20th-century-billions

Banks are in the business to make money off of investments, not to make racial statements. Factors like income, liabilities, employment history, credit history and whatever other factors they consider go into making loans on an individual basis. "Whatever other factors"  mustn't include race and I would agree to make a line denoting race to be illegal on any loan application along with quietly factoring it in. I would hope and expect that these banks' lending policies were developed in a race-neutral way and that individual loan decisions were based on the strengths of the applications and the creditworthiness of the borrowers.

With that said two points: First, I wonder if taking these other important factors into account mitigates or eliminates the racial discrepancies in this report. This is what I would expect to find, I believe accusations "systemic racism" in lending practices would melt away under that microscope, but if they do not, then I agree that these banks deserve the lawsuits coming their way. Second, any lender that refuses to make loans to a borrower based on the color of their applicant's skin rather than on their creditworthiness is a moron and the bank across the street should reap the benefits of that stupidity.

These policies have to be based on creditworthiness rather than government intervention for outcomes. As you may recall, one of the driving factors leading up to the Bushtarded housing/banking crisis in 2007, pressure was put on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to increase loans to dubious low income borrowers based on factors other than creditworthiness. To a lesser extent, the CRA put pressure on banks to make riskier loans as well. I don't want to criticize CRA or ACORN too terribly much because I supported their goals and maybe didn't fully understand their policies at the time.

As always, and this is key, the place to measure racism bias is divergent decisions based on the input factor going into a process rather than simply noticing disproportionate outcomes on the back end. If loan processing policy had been developed in a race-neutral way, and applied in a race-neutral way, then disparate outcomes don't matter. Disparate outcomes are only a warning that racism may be present, not proof.

 

-------

As for issues facing black farmers, no doubt both they and small white farmers faced terrible circumstances through the middle of last century, problems that came down doubly hard on blacks as they also had to deal with racial discrimination piled on top.  The way that the government treated small farmers to the benefit of large planter class and corporate agriculture, then and now remains awful. Small farmers of all colors are under pressure and while your link speaks extensively to the plight of black farmers, there is a void as to the plight of white ones. 

It doesn't go into providing any indication that the sh*t black farmers are forced to deal with in the last sixty years is any different than the sh*t white ones deal with. I do suspect their situation/plight is identical because laws based on race have been illegal everywhere during this time.

I am not an expert on the USDA and farm policy. I just know that small farmers have had a difficult time dealing with competition mega-corporate agribusinesses and only a pedestrian understanding as to the details of what that entails.

[TimHauck 1,799]

27 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Banks are in the business to make money off of investments, not to make racial statements. Factors like income, liabilities, employment history, credit history and whatever other factors they consider go into making loans on an individual basis. "Whatever other factors"  mustn't include race and I would agree to make a line denoting race to be illegal on any loan application along with quietly factoring it in. I would hope and expect that these banks' lending policies were developed in a race-neutral way and that individual loan decisions were based on the strengths of the applications and the creditworthiness of the borrowers.

With that said two points: First, I wonder if taking these other important factors into account mitigates or eliminates the racial discrepancies in this report. This is what I would expect to find, I believe accusations "systemic racism" in lending practices would melt away under that microscope, but if they do not, then I agree that these banks deserve the lawsuits coming their way. Second, any lender that refuses to make loans to a borrower based on the color of their applicant's skin rather than on their creditworthiness is a moron and the bank across the street should reap the benefits of that stupidity.

These policies have to be based on creditworthiness rather than government intervention for outcomes. As you may recall, one of the driving factors leading up to the Bushtarded housing/banking crisis in 2007, pressure was put on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to increase loans to dubious low income borrowers based on factors other than creditworthiness. To a lesser extent, the CRA put pressure on banks to make riskier loans as well. I don't want to criticize CRA or ACORN too terribly much because I supported their goals and maybe didn't fully understand their policies at the time.

As always, and this is key, the place to measure racism bias is divergent decisions based on the input factor going into a process rather than simply noticing disproportionate outcomes on the back end. If loan processing policy had been developed in a race-neutral way, and applied in a race-neutral way, then disparate outcomes don't matter. Disparate outcomes are only a warning that racism may be present, not proof.

 

-------

As for issues facing black farmers, no doubt both they and small white farmers faced terrible circumstances through the middle of last century, problems that came down doubly hard on blacks as they also had to deal with racial discrimination piled on top.  The way that the government treated small farmers to the benefit of large planter class and corporate agriculture, then and now remains awful. Small farmers of all colors are under pressure and while your link speaks extensively to the plight of black farmers, there is a void as to the plight of white ones. 

It doesn't go into providing any indication that the sh*t black farmers are forced to deal with in the last sixty years is any different than the sh*t white ones deal with. I do suspect their situation/plight is identical because laws based on race have been illegal everywhere during this time.

I am not an expert on the USDA and farm policy. I just know that small farmers have had a difficult time dealing with competition mega-corporate agribusinesses and only a pedestrian understanding as to the details of what that entails.

Why would the banks settle if they did nothing wrong?  That’s nice that you “hope” they weren’t racist though, lol.

And no, it was worse for the black farmers.  Here’s a video on the Pigford v Glickman lawsuit that I had actually already seen previously:

 

[TimHauck 1,799]

43 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

 

I hesitate to speak for Volty, but I don't think he is saying no company ever does such things, but rather that it is illegal to do such things, hence the lawsuits and penalties.

About 15 years ago my son went to school (private school, most parents were well off) with the son of a former NFL linebacker, both black.  One day we learned that they were moving to Laveen, a community/city about 30-40 minutes away.  When I asked why, the dad simply said "that's where all of the black people live." It's a perfectly normal neighborhood, middle class, and I was oblivious to this.  I'm confident that some amount of redlining led to black people being concentrated there in the past.  But by this point, it was merely (mostly?) a place with a concentration of black people, and black people chose to live there to be near their own people.  These days, with the explosive growth of Phoenix and fairly good location of Laveen to the downtown area, people of all persuasions are moving there.  

I’m not quite sure what he’s been rambling about, but I’d argue systemic racism exists if it happens in the first place, regardless of whether the victims of it might hope to claw back a few pennies a decade or more later.

[The Real timschochet 2,925]

34 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Banks are in the business to make money off of investments, not to make racial statements. Factors like income, liabilities, employment history, credit history and whatever other factors they consider go into making loans on an individual basis. "Whatever other factors"  mustn't include race and I would agree to make a line denoting race to be illegal on any loan application along with quietly factoring it in. I would hope and expect that these banks' lending policies were developed in a race-neutral way and that individual loan decisions were based on the strengths of the applications and the creditworthiness of the borrowers.

With that said two points: First, I wonder if taking these other important factors into account mitigates or eliminates the racial discrepancies in this report. This is what I would expect to find, I believe accusations "systemic racism" in lending practices would melt away under that microscope, but if they do not, then I agree that these banks deserve the lawsuits coming their way. Second, any lender that refuses to make loans to a borrower based on the color of their applicant's skin rather than on their creditworthiness is a moron and the bank across the street should reap the benefits of that stupidity.

These policies have to be based on creditworthiness rather than government intervention for outcomes. As you may recall, one of the driving factors leading up to the Bushtarded housing/banking crisis in 2007, pressure was put on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to increase loans to dubious low income borrowers based on factors other than creditworthiness. To a lesser extent, the CRA put pressure on banks to make riskier loans as well. I don't want to criticize CRA or ACORN too terribly much because I supported their goals and maybe didn't fully understand their policies at the time.

As always, and this is key, the place to measure racism bias is divergent decisions based on the input factor going into a process rather than simply noticing disproportionate outcomes on the back end. If loan processing policy had been developed in a race-neutral way, and applied in a race-neutral way, then disparate outcomes don't matter. Disparate outcomes are only a warning that racism may be present, not proof.

 

-------

As for issues facing black farmers, no doubt both they and small white farmers faced terrible circumstances through the middle of last century, problems that came down doubly hard on blacks as they also had to deal with racial discrimination piled on top.  The way that the government treated small farmers to the benefit of large planter class and corporate agriculture, then and now remains awful. Small farmers of all colors are under pressure and while your link speaks extensively to the plight of black farmers, there is a void as to the plight of white ones. 

It doesn't go into providing any indication that the sh*t black farmers are forced to deal with in the last sixty years is any different than the sh*t white ones deal with. I do suspect their situation/plight is identical because laws based on race have been illegal everywhere during this time.

I am not an expert on the USDA and farm policy. I just know that small farmers have had a difficult time dealing with competition mega-corporate agribusinesses and only a pedestrian understanding as to the details of what that entails.

You’re an extremely intelligent and thoughtful guy and it shows in a post like this one. 
 

But I also think you’re very naive when it comes to racism. And precisely because you’re so smart, I have to believe your naïveté is willful. I think you realize that it would upset your world view to accept reality on this matter.