Some Red State/Blue State Indicia
- Thread starter nsacpi
- Start date
chop2chip
Well-known member
Isn’t Zohram’s dad supposed to be some hot shot professor?
Regardless of where you stand on American guilt with the American Indian, it’s simply not true they invented the idea of “settler colonialism”. There are dozens of examples of indigenous people that were removed for permanent settlement that date back thousands of years even pre-European colonialism. The Greeks did this in the Mediterranean, Romans to the Celts, Arabs in North Africa as part of the Islamic Conquests, Han Dynasty in China, the Mongolians etc etc. “America is the genesis” is laughably wrong.
I don’t even know where to start with the claim that Hitler got the inspiration for differentiated citizenship from the US
Sorry Zohram’s daddy. Turns out history is complicated. c2c doesn’t feel guilty for what people did hundreds of years ago.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I listened to the clip a couple times. I'm not sure about his claim for settler colonialism being invented in America. By that I take it that he means in the Americas. But in terms of the settler colonialism that spread in the wake of the Age of Discovery, I think there is something to it. While the form varied in some ways in different places, it provided a template for colonialism in Asia and Africa. Although the colonialism in parts of Asia was contemporaneous with events in the Americas. So perhaps it is fairer to say it was reinvented in several places, with the Americas being a place where its early adoption provided a template for other parts of the world.
The part about Hitler is ridiculous. What happened to indigenous people in the Americas is plenty bad, but quite distinct from the Holocaust.
chop2chip
Well-known member
The problem with assigning a “genesis” label to something that’s existed for centuries and somewhat core to civilization’s tribal roots is that it’s really easy to spin any sort of thesis.
You could make a similar argument that European colonialism was an adaptation of the Arab imperial model. But what’s the point?
Tapate50
Well-known member
Exactly
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
yes...there were some innovations but not a genesis in "America"
As someone from a part of the world where the Arab slave trade was predominant and whose ancestry along my maternal line can be traced back to an Indo-Portuguese woman born around 1690 in Surat I am somewhat aware of the contributions made by many ethnic and religious groups to colonialism, slavery, imperialism, etc, etc
Mamdami Senior shows a shocking lack of nuance and balance in his description of events. I have many Indian friends who have a more balanced (and even humorous) take on the English and their evils. High on the positive side of the ledger is cricket (at least to my South Asian and East Indian acquaintances).
To clarify, I mean this kind of cricket.
Last edited:
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
ceteris paribus, does race affect sentencing
Here are some of the key findings:
However — it’s not a simple “race is everything” conclusion. Some important caveats:
Putting it together: If you hold constant everything the model can control for (crime type, criminal history, jurisdiction, etc.), a defendant’s race still appears to have an effect in many settings. For example: two defendants with basically the same offense, background, and plea situation — one Black, one White — the Black defendant is somewhat more likely to receive a longer sentence (or to face more severe charges) in the data.
That means the legal system does not appear to treat “race entirely neutrally” under the models tested. However, it also doesn’t mean race is the sole or predominant factor in all cases — many other factors matter, and the nature of the effect differs by type of crime, jurisdiction, etc.
Since you’re engaged in deep analytical work, here are some research‐style talking‐points you might consider:
ChatGPT said:
Yes — the research indicates that, all else equal (ceteris paribus), race does appear to affect sentencing outcomes in the U.S., though the effects vary importantly by context, crime type, stage of the process, and how well “all else” is controlled. Here’s a breakdown of the evidence, caveats, and what it suggests.
What the evidence shows
Here are some of the key findings:- In federal sentencing data, M. Marit Rehavi & Sonja B. Starr show that after controlling for arrest offense, criminal history, and other observables, Black defendants received sentences that were on average about 10 % longer than comparable White defendants. SSRN+3Michigan Law Scholarship Repository+3Chicago Journals+3
- In that same study, they found that blacks were almost 1.75 × more likely to face charges carrying mandatory minimums than comparable whites, which in turn contributes to longer sentences. Michigan Law Scholarship Repository+1
- In the capital‐sentencing (death penalty) context, studies such as Alberto Alesina’s “Test of Racial Bias in Capital Sentencing” found that when controlling for many observables and using an error‐reversal methodology, courts in first‐degree death‐penalty cases showed higher error rates (indicating harsher treatment) for minority defendants who killed white victims than for minority defendants who killed non‐white victims. NBER+2Harvard Dash+2
- More recent work (e.g., Brendon McConnell, “Racial Sentencing Disparities and Differential Progression…” 2022) finds that some of the disparities stem from earlier stage decisions (charging, plea offers, selection) and when accounting for these, the disparities at sentencing remain but may be underestimated if one only looks at sentencing data. arXiv
Key caveats & important qualifications
However — it’s not a simple “race is everything” conclusion. Some important caveats:- Controlling for all relevant factors is hard. Many studies attempt to hold constant variables like offense type, criminal history, plea deal, jurisdiction, judge, etc. But unobserved variables (e.g., quality of counsel, precise facts of the case, informal adjustments) remain a concern. Some authors caution about attributing all residual differences to bias. NBER+1
- Stage of process matters. Some of the disparity emerges before sentencing — e.g., in charging decisions, decision to seek mandatory minimums, plea bargaining. The sentencing gap is partly a downstream result of earlier disparities. (e.g., blacks more likely to be charged with mandatory‐minimum offenses) SSRN+1
- Context and crime type matter. The magnitude of disparity varies by crime severity (capital vs non‐capital), by victim’s race, by jurisdiction (southern states vs others), etc. For example, Alesina found regional differences (Southern states showing stronger effect) in his death‐penalty test. NBER+1
- Residual gap size is modest (in some contexts). For example, the ~10 % longer sentence for blacks in the federal study is meaningful, but not of the order of “double the sentence” (at least in that data). What matters is that it persists after controlling for many variables. Michigan Law Scholarship Repository+1
What does this imply in plain terms
Putting it together: If you hold constant everything the model can control for (crime type, criminal history, jurisdiction, etc.), a defendant’s race still appears to have an effect in many settings. For example: two defendants with basically the same offense, background, and plea situation — one Black, one White — the Black defendant is somewhat more likely to receive a longer sentence (or to face more severe charges) in the data.That means the legal system does not appear to treat “race entirely neutrally” under the models tested. However, it also doesn’t mean race is the sole or predominant factor in all cases — many other factors matter, and the nature of the effect differs by type of crime, jurisdiction, etc.
For your interest (given your research orientation)
Since you’re engaged in deep analytical work, here are some research‐style talking‐points you might consider:- If you are assembling or using panel data of sentencing outcomes, you may want to include defendant race, victim race, jurisdiction (state, county), offense type, plea vs trial, mandatory minimum indicator, criminal history, counsel type, etc. This allows estimation of residual racial effect.
- Beware of selection bias: Many disparities are introduced before sentencing (charging, plea bargaining, etc.). So hinging only on sentencing data may underestimate the full effect of race across the system.
- Consider heterogeneity: The effect of race may differ by region (South vs North), by crime severity (capital, violent felony, non‐violent), by victim race, by jury vs bench trial.
- Consider “mechanisms”: Why does race matter? Is it via charging decisions (prosecutorial discretion), via judge discretion, via jury decisions, via differences in plea bargaining? For instance, the mandatory minimum finding suggests one channel is prosecutorial charging decisions. SSRN+1
- Consider time trends: Some recent studies suggest selection biases have changed, or that disparities at earlier stages are shifting. The 2022 McConnell study is relevant here. arXiv