We (USA) actually have a very rich history of White-on-Black violence, which is grossly disproportionate given our demographic composition. The public’s ignorance of that history largely reflects a certain editorial perspective (i.e., the perspective of the MSM, politicians, academics, and other powerful interests who benefit from this narrative). It does not reflect the public’s overall attitude toward racially motivated crime. In the past, people were more willing to chalk up the “violence gap” to things like slavery. In 2019, not so much, because it’s the same story in every country on the planet.
The fact is, so much of our society is built upon grievance politics that the people invested cannot afford to let it go. It’s not honest. It’s not healthy. If we want to truly make progress as a society, we need to deal with reality.
That might make sense to you, but in practice, race/identity is only deemed relevant when certain races are involved. When the victim is black (or occasionally Jewish, or Latino), it is presumptively a hate crime. When the victim is White, it is presumptively overblown mischief, or “general crime.” When the criminal is Black, it’s an isolated incident, a symptom of poverty, or biased/racist law enforcement. When the criminal is White, it’s a symptom of widespread White supremacy. Pretty sweet deal if you’re black, but it sucks if you’re White (or presumed White, as George Zimmerman can attest).
I have nothing against Jews, Muslims, Mexicans, blacks, Whites, Indians, Semites, Sikhs, etc. But if the rules are enforced against one group, they should be enforced against all. Let the chips fall where they may.
