Deceptive reasoning by Dr Sohail Ansari

 

Deceptive reasoning by Dr Sohail Ansari 

(I LAUGH BUT BELATEDLY part 6)
 Numbers are deceptive

People justify the spate of recent violence in USA against black by saying different things. They quote number of white people being killed by black and say that ‘black kill many white people, but no one says anything’.

‘I can personally attest that there is plenty of anti-White racism in the USA.  Not only did I experience it myself (I lived in Washington, DC from 1986-1991), but it has been amply documented by people like Colin Flaherty whose books “White Girl Bleed A Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It”

 

We must understand that numbers are deceptive; giving an impression different from the true one; thus misleading. Prof. Boddington has defined statistics as: “The science of estimate and probabilities.” This science is to be drawn for analyzing numerical data for the purpose of inferring proportions in a whole from those in a representative sample.

Suppose one leader of BJP cites the names of many Hindu girls and the women, men and children being subjected to the torture of police in order to absolve Indian police of the charge that it perpetrates atrocities against Muslims at the behest of BJP government.  

About 14.2% of the India's population or approx. 200 million people identify as adherents of Islam.

About 79.8% of the India's population identifying themselves as Hindus, that accounts for 966 million Hindus.

 

Suppose what the leader of  BJP says is true. But  it is not true what a minister  tries to prove until and unless he proves through percentage. A minister has to prove that the percentage of tortured Muslims is not more than  14.2%.

The ample documentation by Colin Flaherty  relies on number; it does not infer proportions.

Suppose it turns out that Muslims are more than 14.2% of all victims of police violence, then a BJP minister must have to prove that Muslims are more prone to crimes.

 

A BJP minister must have to prove that Muslims are more criminal   than Hindus and so much more that they constitute despite being 14.2% of the population much more than 14.2% of all police victims.

 

Colin Flaherty does not prove either that Blacks are more prone to violence than white. Even If he does, he is to account for inhuman treatment that brutalized and dehumanized black.

 

Violence and Institutionalized violence.

The term "institutional racism" was first coined in 1967 by Stokely Carmichael and Charles V. Hamilton in Black Power: The Politics of Liberation. Carmichael and Hamilton wrote that ‘while individual racism is often identifiable because of its overt nature, institutional racism is less perceptible because of its "less overt, far more subtle" nature. Institutional racism "originates in the operation of established and respected forces in the society, and thus receives far less public condemnation than [individual racism]".

Harmon, Amy and  Mandavilli, Apoorva write in  "From Cosmetics to NASCAR, Calls for Racial Justice Are Spreading":  

Institutional racism (also known as systemic racism) is a form of racism that is embedded as normal practice within society or an organization. It can lead to such issues as discrimination in criminal justice, employment, housing, health care, political power, and education, among other issues. 

Institutional racism "originates in the operation of established and respected forces in the society.’’ For our purpose, we use the term ‘Institutionalized violence’ to define violence that originates in the operation of established and respected force that is called police.

 

Hindus enjoy impunity implicated in crimes and often get off scot-free (as this is the case in the India of BJP). But Muslims have no any freedom from the injurious consequences of  similar actions. Muslims of India; therefore, suffer from discrimination in criminal justice.

Muslims of India; therefore, suffer from the institutionalized violence embedded as normal practice within the institution of police.

 

‘Majorities of both black and white Americans say black people are treated less fairly than whites in dealing with the police and by the criminal justice system as a whole. In a 2019 Center survey, 84% of black adults said that, in dealing with police, blacks are generally treated less fairly than whites; 63% of whites said the same. Similarly, 87% of blacks and 61% of whites said the U.S. criminal justice system treats black people less fairly’.

White Girl may bleed but this bleeding does not prove that that white are subjected to Institutional racism.

 

The use of power is to be proved to be the use of the power of a uniform

 

There is the research article ‘The Social Power of a Uniform' by ‘LEONARD BICKMA. Article quotes Joseph  and Alex (1972) pointing out that ‘uniforms serve to identify the wearer's status, group membership, and legitimacy. Throughout history the uniform has been used as  a symbol of authority’.

Coercive  power  is  based on the  agent’s  ability  to  punish  noncompliance. Legitimate  power  is  based on internalized  values which specify that  an agent has a legitimate right to exert influence and that this influence ought to be accepted.  Cultural  values,  acceptance  of  the  social  hierarchy,  or  role prescriptions are often  the basis  of legitimate power. Obedience and compliance to an  experimenter’s  orders  in  laboratoy  situations  are  probably  based  on legitimate power (Block & Block, 1952; Frank, 1944; Milgram, 1963,1965).

People say that only white cops are being reported to have committed violence particularly against black. But same people, however, never quote black cops beating any white (perhaps because that is quite impossible to quote).

Even Suppose people quote black cop beating white people, they have to prove that black cop abuses power vested in him by the virtue of being a part of the police department. Only this can prove that  state power is abused against white people.

Mere torture does not prove anything

 

A BJP minister has to prove that Muslims are subjected to all kinds of indignities and torture because of being criminals not because of being Muslims. And likewise, Hinuds are subjected to police brutalities because of being criminals, not because of being Hindus.

If a BJP minister fails to prove that tortured Muslims were subjected to the torture, not just because of being Muslims; but because of being criminal; and it is also proven that Hindus were subjected to the torture only because of being criminals, then mere quoting the numbers of Hindus being subjected to the police torture will not prove that injustice is not done to Muslims.

“Breathing while black” is the crime, Coleman said. “And that goes back to the history of the country. So many black people were lynched just for being black.

Even if a BJP minister proves that tortured Hindus were innocent; it is to be proved that torture was not the part of corrupt practices of police, aiming at extorting money. And it was to be proved that the innocent Muslims were tortured for the same reason not because of being Muslims.  

In USA even it is proven that white suffer as much as blacks do; but it does not prove that white suffer because of being white. The equality in suffering does not prove that white and black are treated equally.

http://brainqoutesandlogicalthinking.blogspot.com/