'Blacks need to get their act together' vs 'AA social troubles are an American problem'

[Nzinga_Seated]

@Sampiro

Pardon what might be a hijack but it seems relevant to me: is the “being a good student is acting white” meme real or just something that gets reported a lot? Anecdata only but I’ve known many black college students and they don’t seem to scorn intellectual pursuits any more than white students (some certainly do of course but so do many white students). College is a very different environment than high school of course, so I’m interested if black primary school students disdain academics more than white primary school students.

Yeah, I was just about to post this.

I only speak for my own experience with blacks that I know, having been born and raised in ghetto black culture, but my take is;

There is ‘being smart’ and there is ‘acting white’. Both of these terms were often used when I was growing up. Being smart was very much praised by everyone I knew, kids and grownups, poor family members and well to do family members, everyone I knew. If you did well in school, it was bragged about. Not being able to read or reading slow in school was the quickest way to get you ragged on until you cried. Learning was good and I have never, ever heard different in the black culture that I am familiar with.

‘Acting white’, while a stupid term, to be sure, was a very common term. It meant a certain way of talking, walking, dressing and acting that blacks perceived as ‘white’ behaviors. It was cool to be smart, but if you affected a ‘white’ accent you were put down for that. A lot of black kids I know were raised around mostly whites, and they weren’t putting on a white accent…they really talked that way. But the were put down too.

You can be the smartest kid in school and still be cool. But if you were the smartest kid in school and acted ‘nerdy’ ‘geeky’ or ‘white’, you were put down.

Two different things entirely. I hear very often that being smart = acting white in the black community, but that has not been my experience at all. I wonder why so many white people I talk to about it think that?

I will use my daughter as an example. She has had some issues with kids in our culture because of her ways. Unlike me, she doesn’t ‘talk black’, she doesn’t use a lot of black slang (she uses tons of ‘internet’ slang, though) and she doesn’t have…soul, I guess. She is into stuff like anime and she wears glasses and is kind of awkward. She gets crap from kids in our culture about those things in particular. She gets told she ‘acts’ or ‘talks’ white sometimes. Nothing to do with her intellect.

But I only speak from my viewpoint.

ETA: it may be true that blacks don’t place as much time, energy and importance on education as others. Poor blacks, I mean, and blacks in the ghettos. Other things may take precedent over education, which is a shame, but true, I think. But that is entirely different than this ‘smart = acting white’ stuff I have been hearing.

[Sampiro]

@Nzinga

ETA: it may be true that blacks don’t place as much time, energy and importance on education as others. Poor blacks, I mean, and blacks in the ghettos. Other things may take precedent over education, which is a shame, but true, I think.

I also don’t think that’s uniquely black. I grew up in the rural area where there was a lot of poverty (tin roofed shacks and such) and most of them, especially those with single parents, didn’t place a lot of emphasis on education or “book learnin’”, both black and white. When your mom has $10 to last a family of 6 for two weeks it’s probably difficult to care about the Fillmore Administration, The Great Gatsby or how to say “I have a dog with large white spots” in Spanish.

[Malthus]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

I disagree with this actually. Biology has a large degree of influence. Culture is a biologically evolved characteristic in the first place. Biology isn’t the only variable, but its a variable. The biological influences are universal to the species, though. they don’t vary by ethnicity or “race.”

In that humans are capable of culture, yes. Not “biologically determined” in the sense relevant here - by ethnicity or race.

If that’s the case, then the causes are external, and the problem can’t be blamed on just them. That’s my point. The only way to say it’s only them (i.e. to deny any larger external variables) is to blame it on biology.

Yeah, but that’s trivial, mere blame-assigning. Stating that their culture is “the fault” of things that happened in the past does not help, since those things cannot, in point of fact, be changed - assuming the theory is generally true, all that can be changed is within the control of the persons within that culture - that is, the Blacks themselves.

It is sort of like saying ‘it’s not solely your fault you are a criminal, it is also the fault of your terrible upbringing’. That may well be true, but the “upbringing” part can’t be changed, since it now lies in the past.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Malthus

In that humans are capable of culture, yes. Not “biologically determined” in the sense relevant here - by ethnicity or race.

Correct, but any assertion that only black culture is holding black people back leaves no other inference possible.

Yeah, but that’s trivial, mere blame-assigning. Stating that their culture is “the fault” of things that happened in the past does not help, since those things cannot, in point of fact, be changed - assuming the theory is generally true, all that can be changed is within the control of the persons within that culture - that is, the Blacks themselves.

So what’s wrong with thos blacks that they won’t change themselves?

[Malthus]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Correct, but any assertion that only black culture is holding black people back leaves no other inference possible.

No other inference but what?

So what’s wrong with thos blacks that they won’t change themselves?

Their culture, presumably.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Malthus

No other inference but what?

But that the problem is inherent to their genetics.

Their culture, presumably.

That’s just begging the question.

[Blake]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

. Black students did 3% worse than whites and mixed-race students, and 6% worse than Asians (for the UK, Asian = South Asian, not Oriental).

A 3% discrepancy across a national population? Is that even significant? Given the discrepancies between schools and between socioeconomic groups, I’m going to guess that there is in fact no significant difference between blacks and any other race in this instance.

[Blake]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

…any assertion that only black culture is holding black people back leaves no other inference [But that the problem is inherent to their genetics]

Huh.

So if I claim that only the GM corporate culture is holding back GM, then I mean that there is a genetic problem amongst GM executives?

Do you understand that a culture can be real without having any genetic basis whatsoever? That Blacks or GM executives can have a real culture that causes real problems without that culture being in any way genetically determined?

[sisu]

@Nzinga_Seated

You can be the smartest kid in school and still be cool. But if you were the smartest kid in school and acted ‘nerdy’ ‘geeky’ or ‘white’, you were put down.

I will use my daughter as an example. She has had some issues with kids in our culture because of her ways. Unlike me, she doesn’t ‘talk black’, she doesn’t use a lot of black slang (she uses tons of ‘internet’ slang, though) and she doesn’t have…soul, I guess. She is into stuff like anime and she wears glasses and is kind of awkward. She gets crap from kids in our culture about those things in particular. She gets told she ‘acts’ or ‘talks’ white sometimes. Nothing to do with her intellect.

They are not unique to being black. If you are a nerd etc at a white school you will get picked on.

[monstro]

I agree with Nzinga about the “acting white” thing. As a kid, I got much kudos from my black brethren for being smart. The only time I got called “white” was when people were talking about my speech, which lacks an obvious “blaccent”, having grown up with parents from the Midwest. And my ambiguous looks didn’t help. But no one told me to stop acting white just because I read a lot or enjoyed science.

To me, it’s almost like a chicken-egg thing. AA culture has its problems, but where did they come from? Did they just arise in a vacuum? Or those same causes still in existence, just in a more hidden, insidious form?

Individuals have to work their hardest to overcome every obstacle that comes their way and do their best to avoid creating their own obstacles. I definitely think that should be pointed out. But ignoring that our society has historically placed more obstacles in front of other groups than others, and many people and families still bear the effects of those obstacles, can’t be glossed over either.

[amarone]

@Sampiro

Pardon what might be a hijack but it seems relevant to me: is the “being a good student is acting white” meme real or just something that gets reported a lot? Anecdata only but I’ve known many black college students and they don’t seem to scorn intellectual pursuits any more than white students (some certainly do of course but so do many white students). College is a very different environment than high school of course, so I’m interested if black primary school students disdain academics more than white primary school students.

By comparing black college students, you are looking at the wrong people. Clearly they would not view doing well at school as something to be scorned. Try getting the opinions of blacks who did not go to college. Did a significant number of those people not do as well in school (and therefore not go to college) because they did not want to “act white”?

[Alessan]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

What causes culture?

History, mostly. Culture is formed to a large degree by the experiences a group went through in its past.

[monavis]

@orcenio

I got this debate from a recent discussion on race from bloggingheads.tv; here are the condensed arguments:

Glenn’s main argument (~2min).
Amy’s argument; Part 2 (~2min).

The full contextual discussion (10min).

Amy is arguing a position that holds AA as the main contributors to their own social problems. Earlier in the discussion she compares AAs to a parable that says although AAs were wronged in ways that effect them to this day, the only thing holding blacks back (right now) are themselves.

Glenn seems to think that this is an incorrect way to look at the current social problems that effect AAs, as it doesn’t view them within the framework of the larger American society; this ‘lazy thinking’ would ignore any root (non-racial) social causes and limit any discussion/solution to just the ‘in-group’.

While I do see much value in Amy’s points (there is no God-like outsider who can impose social order), I lean more towards Glenn’s position (I think that it is too simplistic to just limit the discussion/problems/solutions to within the in-group/race).

One can say,"Some balcks and also some people, need to get their act together,but not lump people into one big block. Many blacks have their act together, and many white or other skin colors need to get their act together as well. I personally know many blacks who are doing just fine. and I know a lot of whites who are not!

[FuzzyOgre]

@monstro

an obvious “blaccent”,

monstro, that was an awesome portmanteau.

[Nava]

Another issue about comparing the situations of blacks in the US with their situation in other countries where they constitute a large racial group is how long have blacks been there and how did they get there.

There have been blacks in peninsular Spain since… since we were Romans, at least, but they haven’t started being a significant group until the last 20 years (less outside the biggest cities). Comparing the situation of second-generation immigrants to Spain or Italy with that of nth-generation descendants of slaves is a bit of a case of “apples and oranges”, comparing 1st-generation with nth looks more like “apples and hamburgers”; there are many ways in which the black populations of these countries will resemble the Hispanic population of the US (they’re from different countries but get lumped together in the perception of the receiving culture, for many of them their native language is not the local language), others in which they have different problems altogether (unlike those Hispanics or AAs, the black immigrants in Spain or Italy don’t have a common language; many of them are illiterate or barely-literate-in-one-language but speak half a dozen languages). Being able to compare those populations will require large studies, which in many cases would require data that, as RNATB mentioned for France, will not be collected by the government. And what do you do with, say, my baker’s children? Spanish mother, Nigerian father. So do we classify them as “black”, “mulato”, “interracial”, “intercultural”? Do we classify the children of a Nigerian parent and a Guinean one as “intercultural” as well, but not as “interracial”?

[Malthus]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

But that the problem is inherent to their genetics.

That’s just begging the question.

Nonsense. Aside from the fact that only homo sapients is capable as far as we know of what we think of as “culture”, there is no genetic basis whatsoever for culture. Thus blaming “culture” for problems cannot, logically, imply anything about the genetics of the persons involved.

[Malthus]

@Nava

Another issue about comparing the situations of blacks in the US with their situation in other countries where they constitute a large racial group is how long have blacks been there and how did they get there.

There have been blacks in peninsular Spain since… since we were Romans, at least, but they haven’t started being a significant group until the last 20 years (less outside the biggest cities). Comparing the situation of second-generation immigrants to Spain or Italy with that of nth-generation descendants of slaves is a bit of a case of “apples and oranges”, comparing 1st-generation with nth looks more like “apples and hamburgers”; there are many ways in which the black populations of these countries will resemble the Hispanic population of the US (they’re from different countries but get lumped together in the perception of the receiving culture, for many of them their native language is not the local language), others in which they have different problems altogether (unlike those Hispanics or AAs, the black immigrants in Spain or Italy don’t have a common language; many of them are illiterate or barely-literate-in-one-language but speak half a dozen languages). Being able to compare those populations will require large studies, which in many cases would require data that, as RNATB mentioned for France, will not be collected by the government. And what do you do with, say, my baker’s children? Spanish mother, Nigerian father. So do we classify them as “black”, “mulato”, “interracial”, “intercultural”? Do we classify the children of a Nigerian parent and a Guinean one as “intercultural” as well, but not as “interracial”?

The ‘rules’ by which people classify themselves and are classified by others into distinct racial groups are themselves cultural, and vary from place to place. Thus, in North America, a person with one Black and one White parent is usually classified as “Black” rather than “mulatto” or “White”.

[Nava]

Yeah, but that’s in the US. In Spain, those particular four kids are viewed as anything from “black” to “mulatto” (actually the term “café con leche” is much more commonly used), and are barely old enough to self-define. So, in order to compare US data with Spanish data, do we use the Spanish definitions or do we impose US definitions on Spanish people?

[Malthus]

@Nava

Yeah, but that’s in the US. In Spain, those particular four kids are viewed as anything from “black” to “mulatto” (actually the term “café con leche” is much more commonly used), and are barely old enough to self-define. So, in order to compare US data with Spanish data, do we use the Spanish definitions or do we impose US definitions on Spanish people?

It depends on what you intend to measure.

In my opinion, any hope of meaningfully measuring the relative progress of some defined group like “Blacks” is hopelessly compromised by definitional problems. The term is used by different people in different ways, as your Spanish/US example amply demonstrates - in the US, President Obama would be “Black”, but perhaps not in Spain.

To my mind, the relevant facts are culture and socio-economic group (which may be defined by “race”, and maybe not). Attempting to generalize based on “race” and find some sort of inherent, genetic basis for culture and socio-economic status reminds me of those odd studies in Victorian England that purported, against all logic, to show that Cockneys were of a distinct evolutionary species from the English upper class, which explained their poverty, small average size, odd use of slang, etc.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

monstro, that was an awesome portmanteau.

It’s not original to monstro, but yes, it’s awesome.