Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bbsam" data-source="post: 4905186" data-attributes="member: 22662">Perhaps if it were the only or predominant socioeconomic theory in play it would be problematic.&nbsp; You don’t really believe that’s the case do you?And remember, this theory didn’t just pop up in the last 18 months.&nbsp; It’s been around for decades and until Trump and his crew decided to attempt to dismantle it, few knew it existed.It’s not as if every proposal and bill and law is bent and shaped by this theory.&nbsp; But there’s nothing wrong with questioning where we are and have been in race relations when considering how to craft and apply laws.&nbsp; Shouldn’t we be critical when we look at a law that penalizes crack possession far harder than cocaine possession?&nbsp; That’s an extreme example of course, and yes I’m sure some take it to an extreme.&nbsp; But denying its validity or attempting to convince ourselves that race problems were solved in the 60’s is crazy talk.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bbsam, post: 4905186, member: 22662"] Perhaps if it were the only or predominant socioeconomic theory in play it would be problematic. You don’t really believe that’s the case do you? And remember, this theory didn’t just pop up in the last 18 months. It’s been around for decades and until Trump and his crew decided to attempt to dismantle it, few knew it existed. It’s not as if every proposal and bill and law is bent and shaped by this theory. But there’s nothing wrong with questioning where we are and have been in race relations when considering how to craft and apply laws. Shouldn’t we be critical when we look at a law that penalizes crack possession far harder than cocaine possession? That’s an extreme example of course, and yes I’m sure some take it to an extreme. But denying its validity or attempting to convince ourselves that race problems were solved in the 60’s is crazy talk. [/QUOTE]

Verification