[bpmartyr]

A Report from the White Community
By Jerry Agar
Thursday, March 27, 2008

I did not spend a moment today thinking about how to keep the black man down. Just another day.

I can’t remember ever getting a memo about, or an invitation to a strategy meeting on keeping the corporation white.

So stop telling me everything is my fault.

Don’t get me wrong. White people are great organizers. Look at all those St. Paddy’s Day events we recently held. We just are not organizing against blacks.

I am very aware of how well thought-out the vicious racism of the past was and that it was organized by white people. Some of them were judges, and politicians and business leaders; the so-called respectable people of the community. I would apologize for that, but I wasn’t there. That makes it no less a crime.

I am aware that racism still exists. It is a sad part of the human condition. But it is no longer institutional in America and to the extent it exists, it runs both ways.

But as we have heard over and over again lately from the pastor of an 8,000 member church, one of his 20-year parishioners who is running for president, and all of their media enablers, the problems in the black community today are still the fault of us white people. White guys in particular.

In the Chicago Sun-Times columnist Mary Mitchell quotes a spokeswoman for Rev. Wright, Iva Carruthers, commenting on Obama’s speech. “The sad thing about this is, the people who really need to understand the message – white males – I don’t know if it will have any effect.”

Barack Obama calls for the white community to understand that “investing in the health, welfare and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.”

How much larger does he think America’s investment in those areas can get? In real dollars education spending is multiples of what it was four decades ago and test scores have hardly changed. If we have failed perhaps it is time for less government, the prevailing failing authority. Let’s call onto the carpet the people responsible. Is it those evil, suburban white guys again? Well, shame on them – no wait – it turns out that practically all of our big cities are run by liberal Democrats, many of them black. Education is dominated by a teachers union run by liberals, not white Republicans.

Why is Obama willing to let salvation lie in the hands of white people? Would he not be more useful preaching a message of black pride, black ability and self reliance, rather than one of waiting for someone else to love you and hoping, in vain, that the government will? If you think you will succeed, you probably will. If you think you will fail, you undoubtedly will.

The single most important contributing factor to multi-generational poverty is the fact that 70 percent of black children are born to single mothers. Are white guys getting these ladies pregnant and then abandoning mother and child? If so, shame on those white guys. Something should be done. Are black guys the love ‘em and leave ‘em culprits? Yes? Well, shame on them then and leave the white guys out of it. Shame on the women as well.

Too high a percentage of young black men are in prison. Are the courts unfair? We should fix that if it is true, but as Bill Cosby has pointed out, you can argue that a black man getting a tougher sentence for dealing crack than a white guy does for selling cocaine is unfair, or you could stop dealing crack! That’ll fool them. They won’t be able to lock you up.

Are white people putting guns to the heads of black men and forcing them to join gangs, rob stores and deal drugs? No? Then leave us out of it.

Barack Obama referred to a Constitution "stained by this nation's original sin of slavery." How short is the list of nations that never had slavery? Could we just once stop to celebrate the fact that what makes us unique as a nation in terms of slavery is not that we had it, but that America was one of the first nations on earth to outlaw the practice? A lot of white guys died to bring that about. No credit?

The resentment, defeatism and hate that too many black parents and leaders teach their children is so deep that Obama’s preacher, Rev. Wright actually said that Obama is “not a rich man.” He says this why? Is it his knee-jerk evaluation of all black people? Is it the internalized self-evaluation of all black people?

Obama is a United States Senator who lives in a mansion. He is a graduate of Harvard Law. Ditto Mrs. Obama, who lately was earning over $300,000 a year. He has two best-selling books. Chicago Magazine reports that Obama made $737,690 last year (add that to his wife’s income.) That is way more than Democrats are talking about when they scream for more taxes on “the rich.” The Obama’s are the very picture of wealth, power and privilege in America. Did they earn it? Yes they did. Good for them.

I had hope - there it is - that while I could not agree with Obama's socialist policies, he would at least move race relations ahead. Now I know he will not.

I don't think there are simple answers to why blacks still struggle, but Wright's it's-whitey's-fault approach is as simple as they come, and most certainly part of the problem. It's well-known now that you can't solve a problem until you admit it exists. When the rest of America heard what was being preached at Obama's church, they -- to put it mildly -- saw a problem.

How often does it happen that a black person who has done well enough to be interviewed about success gives all the credit to the person who raised him or her? Almost every time. What do they mention particularly? That their parent(s) or grandparent(s) emphasized that life isn’t fair and that they were expected to achieve anyway. Condoleezza Rice says of her parents, "they refused to allow the limits and injustices of their time to limit our horizons." Why isn’t this catching on?

You want to know why white kids succeed? Their parents tell them to. Their parents expect them to. If the school doesn’t provide a book they send their child to the library. You should try the library, it’s free. While the children are doing their lessons the adults could wander over to the self-help section and read “The Seven Habits of Highly Successful People” or something like it. There are plenty of choices. (But not “The Secret,” that’s another get-something-for-nothing book.)

You could point out that while I am busy absolving myself of the problems in the black community I am not doing anything to help. Perhaps that is true, but I didn’t help the Asian children either. How are they doing?

[Nightwanderer]

AWESOME post.

[Red Dog]

Agreed -- Always nice to know there are other reasonable, respectable, and logical people who think just like me!

[ManBeast]

Great post, very well written.

MB

[bioman]

Makes some decent points but on the whole is a bit condescending and prone to over generalizing.

"...but that America was one of the first nations on earth to outlaw the practice?"

Not really close to the first. Also, if you asked a soldier on either side of the Civil War what they were fighting for..next to none would say "To end (or keep) slavery.".


"You want to know why white kids succeed?"

This is kind of a stupid question/statement on the whole. Do we really all succeed? Been to a trailer park lately? If you really want to get racial about which kids succeed, look at Chinese/Japanese/Korean/Viet Namese kids in terms of what the author states about "expected to succeed". In those cultures it's a bit more of a universal paradigm..but then to generalize about any culture would be unwise.

I'm white..not much was expected of me growing up, yet I still got where I wanted to be. I grew up middle class but I can see that if I grew up in a crime ridden area and struggled for basic survival that my attitude would have been totally different. Just food for thought.

Guys like Rev Wright are reactionary products of their generation. In my own family I have white racist products of their own generations. Though I may not agree with these family members, I don't disown them for their beliefs nor do I believe that I should be expected to. Even if Obama were to disown everyone from his past, it would not be enough for his critics..so why should he bother?

[ManBeast]

I agree, there are a lot of poor down-and-out white people around here (mid-missouri), lots of racism in all directions. I spent 2 years working in the payday/title loan industry, and I met as many racist non-white people as I did racist white people. We (meaning all the people in the world) need to recognize that racism is not just a whites hating non-whites problem, it is an anyone problem (meaning that anyone can be racist).

MB

[goslamacamel]

It's not necessarily a problem, it's a human tendency. However sad or disappointing it is.

If you put a big mix of races together, the general tendency will be for each individual to seek others who are most like them, and usually this would mean skin color and appearance for this case.

If you put a bunch of ethnically identical people together, the general tendency will be for individuals to congregate based on secondary factors from appearance, i.e., behavior clothing or interests.

Smart whites/blacks/asians with dumb whites/blacks/asians will separate from eachother based on intelligence before they separate based on appearance.

This problem will not go away, it's a tendency of humans and pretty much all species to assimilate towards those alike to them unless they're trained otherwise (like dogs who are kept in contact exclusively with humans).

[Chad]

good stuff

[strester]

nice find

[Dadof2]

Originally Posted by bioman

Makes some decent points but on the whole is a bit condescending and prone to over generalizing.

"...but that America was one of the first nations on earth to outlaw the practice?"

Not really close to the first. Also, if you asked a soldier on either side of the Civil War what they were fighting for..next to none would say "To end (or keep) slavery.".


"You want to know why white kids succeed?"

This is kind of a stupid question/statement on the whole. Do we really all succeed? Been to a trailer park lately? If you really want to get racial about which kids succeed, look at Chinese/Japanese/Korean/Viet Namese kids in terms of what the author states about "expected to succeed". In those cultures it's a bit more of a universal paradigm..but then to generalize about any culture would be unwise.

I'm white..not much was expected of me growing up, yet I still got where I wanted to be. I grew up middle class but I can see that if I grew up in a crime ridden area and struggled for basic survival that my attitude would have been totally different. Just food for thought.

Guys like Rev Wright are reactionary products of their generation. In my own family I have white racist products of their own generations. Though I may not agree with these family members, I don't disown them for their beliefs nor do I believe that I should be expected to. Even if Obama were to disown everyone from his past, it would not be enough for his critics..so why should he bother?

The South was fighting for States Rights. The North didn't really care about the slaves, other than the fact that they wouldn't mind having them to work in their factories (which they did, and they spent their pay in something called "The Company Store" and they lived on location at the factory. Its not slavery, but close). Grant owned slaves, and there were several other Union Generals who were rediculously racist.

The slavery issue was a slogan that was used to hide the real agenda, the Feds stomping all over the rights of States.

That is not to say that things would have turned out better if the South was allowed to leave, but the motives of the North was about something much larger than slavery.

I am of the personal opinion that you reap what you sow, and that the Civil War and current social issues are all a result of the evils of Colonial Slavery.

[teribleturtle]

Originally Posted by bioman

Makes some decent points but on the whole is a bit condescending and prone to over generalizing.

"...but that America was one of the first nations on earth to outlaw the practice?"

Not really close to the first. Also, if you asked a soldier on either side of the Civil War what they were fighting for..next to none would say "To end (or keep) slavery.".


"You want to know why white kids succeed?"

This is kind of a stupid question/statement on the whole. Do we really all succeed? Been to a trailer park lately? If you really want to get racial about which kids succeed, look at Chinese/Japanese/Korean/Viet Namese kids in terms of what the author states about "expected to succeed". In those cultures it's a bit more of a universal paradigm..but then to generalize about any culture would be unwise.

I'm white..not much was expected of me growing up, yet I still got where I wanted to be. I grew up middle class but I can see that if I grew up in a crime ridden area and struggled for basic survival that my attitude would have been totally different. Just food for thought.

Guys like Rev Wright are reactionary products of their generation. In my own family I have white racist products of their own generations. Though I may not agree with these family members, I don't disown them for their beliefs nor do I believe that I should be expected to. Even if Obama were to disown everyone from his past, it would not be enough for his critics..so why should he bother?

I think the point you make on white trailer parks kids success or lack there of point is really pointing at the fact that most of our social ill's also tied to socio/economic factors. Why do trailer park whites, S. Boston Irish kids, Blacks, Latino's, S. East Asians, do poorly as opposed to others? Well we should examine who the successful others are, if the successful ones are upper middle class White kids, then these kids by birth have an inherent advantage in terms of economic capital and cultural capital that other kids dont have. It is often mentioned by Sociologists ( Pierre Bourdeaux) that social circumstances often perpetuate themselves, for instance a upper middle class kid comes from an educated family of professionals, intellectuals, etc. often the family reinforces consciously and subconsciously what expectations are, often the child fulfills the expectations. The same can be said for the; trailer park, South Boston, or inner city black/latino kids, who come from homes where resources are low, both social and economic and education is almost an alien concept. Often the child fulfills those expectations and continues to perpetuate the same circumstances he was raised in.

This is not to say that success isnt possible I suppose I am an example ( Latino, lower class upbringing, graduating from college this semester, attending grad school next fall, PhD aspirations ) but it is simply the case that it is much more difficult for these individuals to succeed. I have mentioned it before and will mention it again, that we as a society and as Americans should really examine and question this notion of a meritocracy upon which this nation was founded on. I apologize for any spelling/grammatical errors as I was simply trying to be quick on this post. Dialogue and debate is welcome with the intent on pursuing a higher understanding and not simply antagonism.

[Dadof2]

Originally Posted by teribleturtle

I think the point you make on white trailer parks kids success or lack there of point is really pointing at the fact that most of our social ill's also tied to socio/economic factors. Why do trailer park whites, S. Boston Irish kids, Blacks, Latino's, S. East Asians, do poorly as opposed to others? Well we should examine who the successful others are, if the successful ones are upper middle class White kids, then these kids by birth have an inherent advantage in terms of economic capital and cultural capital that other kids dont have. It is often mentioned by Sociologists ( Pierre Bourdeaux) that social circumstances often perpetuate themselves, for instance a upper middle class kid comes from an educated family of professionals, intellectuals, etc. often the family reinforces consciously and subconsciously what expectations are, often the child fulfills the expectations. The same can be said for the; trailer park, South Boston, or inner city black/latino kids, who come from homes where resources are low, both social and economic and education is almost an alien concept. Often the child fulfills those expectations and continues to perpetuate the same circumstances he was raised in.

This is not to say that success isnt possible I suppose I am an example ( Latino, lower class upbringing, graduating from college this semester, attending grad school next fall, PhD aspirations ) but it is simply the case that it is much more difficult for these individuals to succeed. I have mentioned it before and will mention it again, that we as a society and as Americans should really examine and question this notion of a meritocracy upon which this nation was founded on. I apologize for any spelling/grammatical errors as I was simply trying to be quick on this post. Dialogue and debate is welcome with the intent on pursuing a higher understanding and not simply antagonism.

I think that there is definately a correlation there, but what is the answer? It isn't money, we can't just throw money at the lower classes and hope that it improves the situation. This has been tried in this country since LBJ, and it has actually made the problem worse.

The lower classes are trapped not necessarily because of a lack of resources, but because of a lack of anything resembling a functional family (in most cases) and a lack of parenting. Poorly raised kids become poor parents. Not only is it advantageous to have two parents in a home, but having two incomes is a great way to stave off poverty (unfortunately our welfare policies actually encourage single parent families).

These middle and upper middle kids who go on to succeed do so not just because of their financial resources, but because of their family unit. They go on to not only practice what they learned from their parents, but they go on to raise healthy children and perpetuate the cycle.

[Red Dog]

So I have an example very relevant to this article that I think some of you guys might find interesting..

In one sociology recitation I used to be in, every kid had to come up with a question regarding racial discrimination and poll the class (it could literally be about anything as long as it dealt with race)..

Anyways, my question was, "Consider a situation in which you were moving to work in a new city, and you've found two houses in equally distant suburbs that fit your needs perfectly and equally. One is a neighborhood with a homogenous race population (of your own race), and the other has a ~50% population of your own race -- which one would you preferto live in?

Out of 30 people, 28 said they would rather live in the homogenous population -- one said she had no preference, and a second said she would prefer to live in the mixed population (both were black females) -- pretty one-sided.

So, are you a racist if you prefer to live with others of your own race? While nobody in the class favored forced segregation or racial superiority, nearly everybody preferred living with their own race.

What do you guys think? Is that wrong? Which would you choose? I got to ask them another very similar question but I'll save that for later..

[Dadof2]

Originally Posted by Red Dog

So I have an example very relevant to this article that I think some of you guys might find interesting..

In one sociology recitation I used to be in, every kid had to come up with a question regarding racial discrimination and poll the class (it could literally be about anything as long as it dealt with race)..

Anyways, my question was, "Consider a situation in which you were moving to work in a new city, and you've found two houses in equally distant suburbs that fit your needs perfectly and equally. One is a neighborhood with a homogenous race population (of your own race), and the other has a ~50% population of your own race -- which one would you preferto live in?

Out of 30 people, 28 said they would rather live in the homogenous population -- one said she had no preference, and a second said she would prefer to live in the mixed population (both were black females) -- pretty one-sided.

So, are you a racist if you prefer to live with others of your own race? While nobody in the class favored forced segregation or racial superiority, nearly everybody preferred living with their own race.

What do you guys think? Is that wrong? Which would you choose? I got to ask them another very similar question but I'll save that for later..

No I don't believe that wanting to live among your own kind is racism. I believe that it is probably hardwired right into our DNA(tribalism and all), and that it is completely normal.

What is abnormal is our current fascination with multiculturalism, but that is fodder for another thread.

[goslamacamel]

Originally Posted by Dadof2

No I don't believe that wanting to live among your own kind is racism. I believe that it is probably hardwired right into our DNA(tribalism and all), and that it is completely normal.

What is abnormal is our current fascination with multiculturalism, but that is fodder for another thread.

I agree the multiculturalism fanatics are an anomaly given the history of the world. I think the biggest disappointment of America today is how rapidly races are interbreeding. It's sad because when people of two ethnicities marry, the offspring aren't magnificent blends of two cultures - they lose both cultures. The melting pot is really just evaporating rich cultures into one big boring media-mall-music-driven mass.