Analysis: After 60 years, black officers rare

[Woodmonkey]

Originally Posted by cato2

But the fact remains that they do not make the rank.

If that's the case in spite of affirmative action, then they might be on the wrong career path.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by cato2

But the fact remains that they do not make the rank.

I don't disagree with that, IF it's true.

But, even if it IS true, so what?

And, the reasons for it appear to be far more significant than the assertion itself. I was surprised at how few "minority" members of Congress go to the trouble of nominating their constituents for Academy appointments, for example. One would think such appointments would be regarded as high honors to be doled out to "their constituents", presumably people of color and females in particular... in keeping with the mandate so many such elected officials espouse about championing various civil rights causes. Yet, we can depend on the reality that it will be the Congressional Black Caucus (among others) who will be the most vociferous in complaining that there is some kind of intentional denial of rank to their people.

Anyhow, we had the identical problem in the museum profession. It was virtually impossible to attract minorities to enter the business... by any means. Consequently, very very few are in senior positions to this day. In that industry, however, females do seem to have gotten the message and are all but in control of it after 40 years of affirmative action.

The problem I have with the report is that it, once again, leaves the inferred impression that there is some sort of underlying insidious bigotry or unfair/racist discrimination at work, intentionally KEEPING minorities and women away from the highest ranks. That is simply untrue, and injurious to assert.

Furthermore, as to equitable salary/wages, we must recognize that the military and government itself (federal, state and local) is by FAR the single largest employer of Americans, and there is no possibility under the law of females or minorities being paid less for comparable work in those jobs at any level. Add to that the vast number of self-employed females and minorities who, if earning less, have nobody to blame but themselves. Add to that the number of females and minorities who are retired (and receiving whatever they get from various equitable retirement accounts). Add to that those who are not working at any job whatsoever, thus equity in pay is not even a question. Add to that those who are imprisoned and not earning wages subject to equitable pay for comparable work. Add to that those who receive disability earnings, which are all identical according to degree of disability. Add to that the number of females and minorities who are working in female or minority enterprises who would not dare, presumably, pay them less. Add to that those who are employed in illegal activities that come in under the statistical radar. Add to that the fact that it would be practically suicidal legally, and utterly unnecessary for ANY private corporation to intentionally underpay females or minorities for comparable work... in short, the frequency of anybody actually receiving less than white males or males for their comparable work is practically nil, and is certainly exceedingly rare these days.

[cato2]

The reality is that the black or other minorities are not represented in the upper ranks. They are either incompetent, or there are other factors at work and yes it appears to be a subtle form of racism working here.

I bring to the discussion a term in Psychology called "Shooter Bias," that exists in law enforcement. It was shown that whites were more inclined to shoot a black then a white in a high stress situation. Not only were whites more inclined to shoot a perceived threatening black suspect, but blacks officers would as well. The same prejudices were held by both blacks and whites, a subconscious process at work in both cases. Both officers are trained in a professional manner to withhold fire unless they perceive a threat, yet both are shown to be more likely to shoot a black then a white suspect. Both had the same prejudice of perceiving a black to be more threatening to them. And it was a form of prejudice on both parts.

I think there is a subtle form of racism and sexism present in the hierarchy of the military and private business that will take generations to dispell in this multi-racial culture.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by cato2

...or there are other factors at work and yes it appears to be a subtle form of racism working here.

I bring to the discussion a term in Psychology called "Shooter Bias," that exists in law enforcement. It was shown that whites were more inclined to shoot a black then a white in a high stress situation. Not only were whites more inclined to shoot a perceived threatening black suspect, but blacks officers would as well...

I think there is a subtle form of racism and sexism present in the hierarchy of the military and private business that will take generations to dispell in this multi-racial culture.

These facets of the conversation are where I have to take at least some issue. I do not buy that argument because I doubt that it can be proven, nor that it exists to the degree deserving of such unending journalistic and academic reporting or analysis.

I try to imagine how "Shooter Bias" might function, in real life. Though I'm confident that errors in judgement are made, I think there's something else involved that overrides an assertion of racial prejudice being at work. Namely, it is blacks who have, for decades at least since the Black Panther Party and now up through certain varieties of the Rap "gangsta" culture made it explicitly clear repeatedly and openly their hatred of law enforcement and their intentions to be violent in expressing their hatred toward whites and authorities. They loudly declare that NOBODY can know what they live through, and that this alone justifies anything they might deem necessary to say or do... urban terrorists in practise, "artists and activists expressing free speech" clothed as helpless sheep in fact... who profit from the suffering they themselves persist in perpetuating.

That alone would make anyone far more likely to go into self-defense mode more quickly when there was any doubt about the intent. It would me, for sure.

When I was in college in Chicago I used to have to take the El train everywhere, lacking a car, young family, GI Bill and work study earnings etc etc etc.

One night 40 years ago on the platform a young black guy came up behind me and put a knife to my throat, saying in my ear, "Mr. Brown, empty your pockets." I gave him the $16 dollars... and have ever since been highly wary of young blacks dressed a "certain way" and behaving in a "certain way" in public places. In fact, this alone has governed where I go, with whom, at what times of day, in what neighborhoods and for what reasons. It has, indeed, caused me to seek the protection of "concealed carry". There will not be a "next time."

So, what I am suggesting is that the issue of military officer's rank is much more complicated than "subtle racism"... as the report which began this thread made very very clear.

What is astonishing is that despite having evidence of numerous OTHER causes for these situations, they are consistently perceived and reported as being due to racism or sexism... subtle or blatant.

Latter-day "victims" of racism and sexism long ago became experts as constructing their propaganda in that manner, to the degree that such conclusions fall into place almost automatically and virtually without rebuttal. It is clearly in their best interest for the problem never to go away or be resolved (think of the industries that 100% depend on perceptions of racism for their income!), or for them to claim that no matter HOW far we have come it will still be "generations" before prejudices are eliminated... so, their open-ended victimhood never ends, there is always always something else that needs to be done, some new program or policy to institute, some new class of sufferers to reveal, some more money to be thrown at "redressing grievances", some new law to enact, some new committee to form or conference to hold, some new magazine or newspaper or blog to publish, some new university department or chair to be funded.

My opinion is that the whole thing is essentially BS.

[cato2]

That is exactly what we have here BlueHawk, your opinion. I am sure you realize a study is not some arbitrary undertaking. I am not sure how much research you have done using scientific method, but these studies are not opinions and they are in fact challenged and modified IF they can prove otherwise.

Here is a 16 pg study from Chicago as well:
The Police Officer’s Dilemma:
Using Ethnicity to Disambiguate Potentially Threatening Individuals
http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/bernd....ers/cpjw02.pdf

Lets throw in something for woman as well, access to credit.
Women's Access to Credit Affects Efficiency in Rural Households

Seattle, WA – July 24, 2008 – Rural strategies designed to induce economic growth often emphasize the need to improve access to capital for poor households. However, this approach implicitly assumes that family members pool all their resources and allocate them to their most efficient use. Men and women may differ in their access to credit and may choose not to alleviate their partners’ constraints. A new study in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics shows how rural households in which women are not able to meet their needs for capital do not produce as much as they could.
http://blackwellpublishing.com/press...m.asp?ref=1840

[Bluehawk]

Cato, my friend... I have personally done enough academic research using the scientific method to know that it can be and is routinely biased by presumptions and false premises, and that it furthermore is frequently used by some to prove points not intended or demonstrated by the research or the method.

Steadfastly using that report to assert any form of purposeful racial bias in the promotion of military officers as if it were institutionalized, subtle or otherwise, would constitute a perfect case in point... as would have been the method which at one time "scientifically" showed that blacks were intellectually, morally and physically inferior to other races.