Because there are significantly more people who are the offspring of native black folk versus immigrant black folks? Seems like an obvious answer.
And Dewey, you act as if black Americans are mouth-breaking, knuckle-draggers. Every successful black African immigrant can be matched with a black American just as successful, if not more. Although we are constantly reminded of our shortcomings, black Americans certainly have much to be proud about. Black immigrants–as well as other nonwhite immigrants–owe much of their success here to the human rights’ struggle of black Americans. They are riding on our coattails, so to speak, and it would be wise for everyone to realize this before beating us over the head with our “failures”.
Chris Rock, as much as I love em, isn’t a cite. If your only glimpse of this issue is from a comedian’s perspective, then it’s probably best not to argue like you know something the rest of us don’t.
That was your inference, not my implication. I only noted that the number of people who were not descended from slaves is tiny and noted an example of supporting, not conclusive, numbers.
As to the dodge about the number of free blacks in 1865, you do realize, I hope, that all but one or two of them were, themselves, the descendants of slaves and that they were largely compelled to associate only with other descendants of slaves in the period of Jim Crow and lynchings.
I doesn’t. Why do you assume that one drop of blood from an immigrant erases all the abuses on the other side of the family?
The point, as I have noted, is that even the immigrants (prior to the last few decades) were generally confined to the same situations as those who had descended from slavery. Their children were denied opportunities for housing and employment. They were subject to the same risk of lynching (frequently aimed at the established blacks of a community to let others know to keep their heads down). They were still subjected to disenfranchisement. They were still subjected to both arbitrary laws that imposed financial burdens on them and they still faced the possibility of being the victims of anti-black-wealth riots. That is the sort of culture that the overwhelming percentage of the black population has to deal with, regardless of their origins.
You are the one who has posted repeatedly about the number of blacks who were not descended from slaves as if this miniscule number of people represented some serious point of discussion. While I don’t think your opponents are doing a good job of explaining all of their points, your point appears to me to be meaningless. It is sort of like looking at the U S Senate when two new members were elected without prior experience and saying that the Senate is not filled with politicians.
Recent immigrants have escaped many of those issues. However, recent immigrants are tiny in number.
Poppycock. If Immigrant A marries slave descendant B, why doesn’t their offspring pick up the cultural heritage of A? Why does the mere fact that the child has a slave descendant as a parent eradicate the cultural heritage she inherits from the other parent? **
This is an abject lie. I have said nothing remotely resembling this. **
This is at odds with the facts. As a group, immigrant blacks meet with more success than blacks with longer roots in this country. Yes, there are many successful blacks with long roots, and there are many unsuccessful immigrant blacks, but as an aggregate immigrant blacks tend to be more sucessful. There isn’t the 1:1 ratio you claim.
I can hunt for cites if you wish. **
Unless you’re seriously claiming that no blacks immigrated to this country between 1865 and the dawn of the modern civil rights movement, the accusation of coattail riding is somewhat misplaced. **
That’s why I ended my paragraph with the note that more serious minds have made the same observation Rock does. Consider the works of John McWhorter, Shelby Steele, or John Ogbu. Chris Rock neatly distills the issue, but he isn’t the only source of the observation.
Sorry, but I don’t think a reasonable reading of your post supports this interpretation. You were very clearly using the 34,658,190 and 700,000 to get the 1 in 50 ratio (modified by White Africans).
If you admit to making a mistake every once in a while your world will not cave in. Try it.
What in the world might you be talking about here? At no point have I made any reference to the number of free Blacks in 1865. Nor has anyone else, to my knowledge.
Possibly you have me confused with someone else. On some other message board. Or an alternative universe. Whatever.
No need to hunt for cites - there’s some data on this in the linked page in my response to tom on the preceding page. Now that’s IzzyR for you - a guy out there providing real links to valuable data, even before being called upon, and that’s without even mentioning his - er…umm…sorry about that…now what was I talking about? Oh, yes, I remember. I’m not sure how conclusive such comparisons are. It might be that the African immigrants are predominantly drawn from the upper echelons of African society (who figure they - or their children - can do a whole lot better as a doctor or lawyer in the US than they can with the same job in Africa). As compared to the native born Blacks who start off at the bottom (sociologically).
A gag from a comedian sums up a complex sociological question for you?
With your Chris Rock reference, you seemed to be implying that some sort of moral weakness exists within slave descendants which does not exist within other groups. Is that what you intended? If not, then what do you think is inherent to this community which prevents them from having comparable success to other groups, even groups with the same skin color?
What makes you think it’s like this? Do you have a good reason to believe that people who are a blend of immigrant and American-born parents have an eradicated" heritage?
I know many people who are the product of Caribbean-American blends, and they–like any product of a multi-cultural home–have both heritages to draw from. Don’t know why you think it’s different for Africans.
No, you just keep belaboring the negative differences betwen black immigrants and native black Americans, talking about cultural ills and whatnot, while downplaying things like 300 hundred years of discrimination.
I’m not claiming anything like that, but I am claiming that Africans arriving IN THIS COUNTRY TODAY would have a much more harrowed experience if NOT FOR THE SACRIFICES made by the descendents of the American slaves. Africans did not pay the price; Americans did! For you to question even this basic fact makes me think you are arguing for the sake of arguing.
I’m sure if a million black Americans rich enough to migrate moved to Europe, you would find that this population tends to be more successful than the European population as a whole. Does that mean Europeans suffer from cultural “ills”. Does that mean black Americans as a whole are wealthy and educated? Or does it mean it’s stupid to compare immigrants to natives?
Dewey, do you remember that it was me who mentioned that African immigrants tend to be wealthier than the black Americans stationed on this little rock of ours? I’m not disputing this. I’m disputing your assertion that this difference indicates that there is something wrong with black Americans.
No point, really. I was being facetious. Hence the “Seriously though…” in the next sentence.
No it hasn’t. Not once, by anyone.
But here, let me help you out with a few quotes that might be confusing you:
From **Diogenes the Cynic:
**
and
And from **dakravel:
None of those are saying “White people have no culture.” They are saying that white people’s culture does not derive from their skin color. It derives from the country or region from which their ancestors came, which vary greatly, and from the mixture of those various cultures here in America.
And by the way, before anyone jumps on me for this: No, I am not saying that black culture is based solely on skin color either. I am not making a comparison between blacks and whites. Simply adressing certain specific false statements.
I don’t think that’s what Diogenes was saying. “Latino” is used to designate a specific cultural heritage, regardless of a person’s country of origin or the color of their skin. That’s why Sammy Sosa and Christina Aguilera would considered themselves part of a particular culture, even though they have different countries of origin and skin colors. What unites them (although there are other elements of Latino culture) are language (Spanish, most commonly) and religion (Roman Catholicism, most commonly).
The same cannot be said for the term “Asian”. What common cultural commonalities do people from from Saudi Arabia, India, Indonesia, China, Japan, etc. have? Language? Religion? The only thing that the above have in common is that they happen to all be located in Asia. So in this instance, Asian is more properly a geographic designator rather than a cultural/ethnic designator.
I think this is an erroneous assumption. You assume that African immigrants are all educated and wealthy. I suspect this is far from the truth. We have a little Somalia close to my neighborhood. These folks are anything but wealthy. But for the most part they do see the value in work and education. I would say moreso than a significant portion of the black population as a whole.
African immigrants not only come here with better credentials than black Americans, but they surpass Americans as a whole and other immigrant groups.
Most immigrants move to a place to make opportunities for themselves and their families. Black Africans value work and education, as do immigrants from Asian, Central America, Europe, etc. I bet if you compare the “value in work and education” for a typical Russian immigrant family with a typical white American family, you would see a difference there, too. Being the new guy on the block acts a motivator to “show them”. Remember the whole “American dream” they try to sell overseas?
Native-born Americans of all colors are more pessimestic.
I would say the attitude of people like yourself is not helpful.
I think a serious problem is the widespread notion that discrimination is so all pervasive that it is almost futile to try to make it through hard work - that the focus has to be on fighting discrimination - end that and it will all come easy.
Many many Black people think White people have it a whole lot easier than they actually have it, simply by virtue of being White.
Also, over the years there has developed a tremendous entitlement mentality in this country, in which people feel that society/the government owes them a decent job, housing etc. This too takes away the incentive to go out and work for it yourself.
These attitudes are more prevalent in the native Black community than they are among recent African immigrants.
Skipped through some of this but I had something to bring up.
On school applications and forms, or tests or whatever, they sometimes have a box to fill in your “race” and it’s usually
Asian
(insert some island places)
African-American
Hispanic
Caucasian
Caucasian ain’t just a skin color, its compared equally to african american, asian, or hispanic.
African American = Black
Caucasian = White
If you have a black club, how come you can’t have a white club.
Does anyone have an answer about WHY you can NOT have a white club, one that is COMPARABLE to the black club, except for the “white” part, an answer that doesn’t just say “cuz its offensive”?
So suggesting that a white person might want to purchase a higher SPF sunscreen than a black person is racist? Or to recommend different hair care products to a black person than you would a white person? For a medical professionals to note differing incidences of things like heart disease and sickle-cell disease in persons of different races, and adjust care accordingly?
That’s nonsense. Of course there are differences between people of various races, based on both physical characteristics and historic and socioeconomic background. Some are trivial, and some not so. That’s not to say that any one race is superior to another, but to ignore the obvious fact of those differences, and the fact that they may possibly require race-specific actions, is blind foolishness. Simply to acknowledge that there are differences between people is not to say that one type is better than another, or more deserving, or more anything at all. It is not inherently racist, at least not in any useful or meaningful sense of the word.
I think the Rock bit is a nice illustration of the kind of cultural issues I’m talking about, but again, I noted several scholars that have made similar observations. **
Let’s just say I think guys like John Ogbu (RIP) are on to something.
That stupid form means absolutely nothing. The terms on the form are not even comparable. It asks for “race” and then lists a bunch of options which, with the exception of “caucasian” cannot be called races. They are broad ethnic groups at best, and in the case of “Asian,” not even that. “Caucasian” is in a completely different category than "Hispanic’ or “African-American.” Just because some moronic, beaurocratic form wants to mis-classify people in such bizarre fashion does not automatically imbue those classifications with any legitimacy.
You can’t have a “white” club because it’s racist, pure and simple. If you actually read the fucking thread you’ll see that the other clubs in question are not based on skin color but on culture.