693

"If the purges [of potential voters], challenges and ballot rejections were random, it wouldn’t matter. It’s anything but random. For example, an audit by the State of Washington found that a Black voter was 400% more likely than a white voter to have their mail-in ballot rejected. Rejection of Black in-person votes, according to a US Civil Rights Commission study in Florida, ran 14.3% or one in seven ballots cast."

"[...] Democracy can win* despite the 2.3% suppression headwind.

And that’s our job as Americans: to end the purges, the vigilante challenges, the ballot rejections and the attitude that this is all somehow OK."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Soulg@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 years ago

It's actually very natural to form in/out groups. The issue is getting the species as a whole to overcome it.

[-] absentbird@lemm.ee 14 points 2 years ago

In/out groups are natural, but the establishment of those groups on 'racial' lines is totally constructed. The concept of race itself doesn't hold up to scrutiny, it's a fixation on specific phenotypic traits.

Notice how racial bias is fixated on skin color while other phenotypic differences are largely ignored; people with different colored eyes or hair, different nose shapes, different hair textures, etc. 400 years ago skin tone was similarly trivial, but that changed with the rise of chattel slavery.

[-] umean2me@discuss.online 3 points 2 years ago

This is what I was trying to say but didn't have the foresight to elaborate and that seems to have earned me some downvotes lol

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

The core tenet of tribalism is "They aren't like us." That might be based on skin color, hair type, clothing, smell (from different diets), behavior. Modern racism (from the last couple hundred years) likely has some elements of more traditional tribalism with relaxed standards so the people a few hundred miles away can start to wrap their heads around the idea that Irish, for instance, are more or less the same as British.

I do hope people can get to the idea that anyone from a given point on this planet (so far) is just a person and not an outsider, but it looks like we have a way to go.

[-] ubergeek@lemmy.today 5 points 2 years ago

The core tenet of tribalism is “They aren’t like us.” That might be based on skin color, hair type, clothing, smell (from different diets), behavior.

That's just not accurate. Its historically been cultural, not phenotypes.

Prisoners of war, which were different skin colors, tended to be accepted into the group once they adapted the captor's customs.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

For the last 200 years, a significant amount of slavery has been limited to certain phenotypes. I agree that prior to that, it was less prevalent. That doesn't mean we don't have a historical model of slavery based on phenotype, it's just more recent history.

[-] ubergeek@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago
[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

An aberration like industrialization, greater transportation, and intragenerational mobility, causing widespread societal change and cultural norms?

[-] ubergeek@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago

Nah, even smaller than that. It's pretty much limited to European cultures, and only for the last 400 years or so.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

On the other hand, the Irish were enslaved by the British centuries before any Africans were. And it's not because they had no contact. Everyone in Europe who had any power and influence was aware of Mansa Musa, and there were plenty of Sub-Saharan Africans in Iberia and other parts of the Caliphate in Europe.

Being black was just not the liability it eventually became. Being nearby but in a different country was a much bigger one.

this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2025
693 points (93.9% liked)

politics

31376 readers
2346 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS