People hear 'racism' and they think of that speech in the 60s 'segregation now, segregation forever' and firehoses, but it can be much more insidious than someone hating a subsection of people. It can be systemic in the sense that some people are not afforded the things most of us take for granted, like the protection of law, or due process of law, or innocence until guilt is proven, because there j isn't a will do it at the levels that matter.
Fictional example: a cop is a problem, he tends to be heavily aggressive in his actions but he is also stupid and unlikeable. People he works with complain and he pissed off some people in the district. District administrator decide it is easier to transfer him to bumfuck, where if there are any complaints they can ignore them because they have no political power or pull, rather than let him mess with people who have the ability to get the media or politicians involved.
This isn't even a conscious decision -- people in bumfuck don't complain because they are used to shitty treatment and no recourse, so they don't bother, whereas people like you or I would treat it as a travesty and get worked up and make a huge stink. The fact that it works like this makes it easy and the admin doesn't have to worry about it any more. Wash hands, done deal.
I know that this is frustrating and sometimes can look very much like opportunistic virtue signaling, and many times it can be, but I would caution against immediately dismissing such claims when they are made and defended by parties that otherwise would not have reason to do so.
[1] I wish we had a different word that didn't have all the loaded connotations inherent in 'racism' especially with its use in the past as a excuse for slavery, but we don't...
I was enjoying reading what you'd previously written but changed, about domain knowledge and how domain experts can guess based on the outcome what was likely going on inside the system (EDIT: paraphrasing from memory, so I hope I got it right). I'd never thought about it like that before, very interesting perspective. But even then you'd have to be careful to make bloody sure your assumption, experience based though it is, was actually factually correct before tarring someone with racism.
I hope my interactions here don't coming off as me dismissing people concerns/claims. I'm simply trying to take an objective view of the situation as presented. I'm aware that some people consider objectivity a problem in and of itself.
I hope you understand my hesitancy in such a public medium, and I appreciate your feedback.
Either way I've enjoyed this discussion and have learned from it. I wish you all the best.
Call it one part racism, three parts utter indifference, with an occasional dash of one or two exceptions actually giving a damn and attempting to do the right thing.
You're correct that no simple definite conclusion can be reached here on logic alone, however from context many can distinguish a hawk from a heronsaw given a favourable wind.
Based on the information would you conclude it was racist if the accused person was white? Would you conclude it was racist if the cop was also a first nation/aboriginal? I doubt it. What would your conclusion be then?
> What do you think the RCMP was even for?
To police their communities? Or, based on your preceeding sentences are you suggesting that the RCMP's purpose is racism?
At the time, there was no significant population of settlers in the area. Most people were either fully or at least partly Indigenous like the Metis.
The goal was to protect First Nations from American settlers and prevent violence between the two which would trigger US military intervention.
This occurred in the wake of the Cypress Hills Massacre:
> The Cypress Hills Massacre occurred on June 1, 1873 [...]. It involved a group of American [...] hunters, and a camp of Assiniboine people. [...] The Cypress Hills Massacre prompted the Canadian government to accelerate the recruitment and deployment of the newly formed North-West Mounted Police.
> [Canadian Prime Minister John A.] MacDonald's principal fear was that the activities of American traders such as the Cypress Hills Massacre would lead to the First Nations peoples killing the American traders, which would lead to the United States military being deployed into the NWT to protect the lives of American citizens on the grounds that Canada was unable to maintain law and order in the region.
> The creation of the police force also had a political motive. The investigation into the massacre was to ensure that First Nations in the area were able to trust the Canadian government. The investigation would require international cooperation of two federal governments, and the North-West Mounted Police would take measures to make examples out of international criminals. Although ultimately no prosecution took place, the willingness to seek justice for any Canadian contributed to the establishment of peace between the NWMP and First Nations.[9]
Establishing trust and security with the First Nations was a key motivation:
> The creation of the police force also had a political motive. The investigation into the massacre was to ensure that First Nations in the area were able to trust the Canadian government. The investigation would require international cooperation of two federal governments, and the North-West Mounted Police would take measures to make examples out of international criminals. Although ultimately no prosecution took place, the willingness to seek justice for any Canadian contributed to the establishment of peace between the NWMP and First Nations.
Don't call me Shirley. ;-)
As I said, that's very much a matter of perspective about which is more prevalent or more likely to be prevalent in the RCMP: incompetence or racism. If you include the context of the RCMP's history, racism does indeed seem more prevalent.
> Based on the information would you conclude it was racist if the accused person was white? Would you conclude it was racist if the cop was also a first nation/aboriginal? I doubt it. What would your conclusion be then?
I said I don't think one can draw a conclusion from the information provided, so I'm not sure why you are asking these questions. No, nothing you said would lead me to draw a conclusion.
Stupidity = racism Malice = racism
> Hanlon's razor isn't about proof. It's about recognizing that one often projects intent onto circumstances where none exists.
Exactly. That is my point. I'm not denying that racism can exist with or without malice, though I'd argue intent has to play a part. My point is based on the information from the article you cannot determine the interaction was racist and calling it so is projecting an intention on it that you cannot say exists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_freezing_deaths#:~:t....
Now called "Starlight Tours"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/25/darrell-night-...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/rcmp-investigate-two-freezing...
2017 death in custody
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/02/canada-rcmp-of...
Baffling
It's obviously not certain that racism was a factor in this case, but the assumption is anything but ridiculous or unhinged. If you aren't white, malice always has to be a factor to consider in any interaction with the American or Canadian government.
The RCMP is a national service, and the kinds of officers posted to a remote reserve like Duncan's First Nation might not be the best of the best. They are paying their dues in a para-military organization, with no union (unlike most cops). They are over-scheduled, and likely far from their homes. An adversarial relationship between the members of an RCMP detachment and local band is sadly common.
There is definitely more to it. We're hearing the story from one side, and there are many good reasons why the parties on the other side wouldn't share all of their context. Honestly, as I was reading it, I was thinking that it was both conceivable this was a gross miscarriage of justice and an outright failing of the police forces, it's also entirely possible that the guy is as guilty as sin and they're just having trouble putting a case together (which is common when dealing with online fraud).
Keep in mind the police forces might arrest someone, but it's the prosecutors that make the decision about whether to bring charges. The prosecutors could have vacated the charge entirely, but chose not to. There's a lot of possible explanations for why they didn't, but that part of it isn't the RCMP's responsibility.
If he is guilty, why did the order fulfillment from Amazon register the delivery from Walmart?