Because I’m a right-wing bomb-thrower? 
Honestly, I wanted to start a thread on race and hypocracy and politics. I added some links without giving them a whole lot of thought just to provide a little bit of background.
Now that I’m a member I promise to read the GD threads on etiquate. (Why isn’t there a spell-check feature in this system!)
Because individual suits are harder to prosecute on a “he said/he said” basis (and therefore less likely to be successful) as opposed to class suits where general practices may be demonstrated statistically, and because with limited resources, chasing individual cases, rather than chasing class cases, effectively reduces the amount of real world enforcement. It is the equivalent of using all your EPA resources to chase down and fine litterbugs while ignoring the major polluting industries. In other words, it was a clear case of burying their effort to prevent discrimination in minutiae, thereby harming the general black community.
um…cite?
um…cite?
um…cite?
Well, in addressing your request for cites, the raindog, the Department of Education from 2000 states that 25 percent of Americans over age 25 have four or more years of college. The same volume states that 16 percent of African Americans have bachelor’s degrees. (Note that the data are not exactly comparable. One can be in college for four or more years and not earn a college degree.)
askia’s other points are harder to confirm, and I would probably disagree. We do know from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 1999 data that the median income for Black households is $27,910, and that it is $42,504 for White households. It depends on where we demarcate the income levels for poor and working class, I suppose. What I would argue is that given the lack of intergenerational property and income transfer among African Americans, a) many Black families, if not working class or poor, are closely connected by geography or family ties to Black families that are poor - and may well contribute income and goods to other families, and b) many Black families are not comfortably middle class - that is, downsizing, or a loss of a job may relegate the family to a lower socioeconomic strata. (Before anyone gets too excited, this is also true for many families across racial groups.)
I actually read the Wikipedia entry on Clarence Thomas… and I was a little surprised. I had no idea he founded a Black Student Union as a college student, nor did I know that he expressed concern about the future of Black colleges in the Fordice decision. However, I will state that his views on issues such as affirmative action (which he has termed as “racial paternalism”) puts him out of step with many African Americans. (A Pew Trust poll in 2003 found 87 percent of African Americans supported affirmative action in college admissions.)
I think the big perception problem for Thomas, for example, is the fact that his involvement in, and support of the African American community appears to be nonexistent. The NAACP, Urban League, and Black fraternities and sororities are not the only organizations that one can demonstrate affiliation or support for issues pertinent for African Americans. This might be where brickbacon is going re: consciousness.
When one chronicles the most respected African Americans among African Americans (this is my opinion as a researcher and a member of the African American community) - the Martin Luther King, Jrs, Barbara Jordans, Rosa Parks, Harry Belafontes, Jesse Jacksons, and so forth - the common thread is that these people have dedicated significant time and energy to supporting and sacrificing on the behalf of Black Americans. Individually, Justice Thomas has done very well, but what has he done to actively support the progress of other African Americans? Perhaps he is, or has, done something. But compare him to Thurgood Marshall, who spent his professional life arguing cases to ensure that Black Americans would receive equal protection under the Constitution.
I would argue that most African Americans understand and appreciate this difference. For instance, the sociologist Charles Willie investigated prominent African American scholars and was surprised when he learned that many of the scholars he expected to be named were not. The response from the academicians he polled was that prominence was not simply a matter of where one taught, or the number of publications, but also a matter of how that scholar supported the African American community. Not all, of course. There are a number of African American celebrities who are well known but perhaps do not emphasize (or engage in) community activities. They may be popular or well known, but not necessarily held in high esteem as role models. I don’t think this distinction is unlike my Jewish friends in college involved in Hillel and ADL, for example.
This gulf of understanding is why folks like renob view Jackson, Sharpton, and others as “harmful” to the Black community. These public figures are far from perfect, and I think most Black folks know that. However, they have long histories of assisting the poorest, most disenfranchised members of the Black community - the ones who may have criminal records, who are not well educated. When you’re in trouble or the victim of racial discrimination, these are the folks you call because they a) show concern and care for your plight and b) can bring media attention to your situation.
I imagine many White people feel that if they suffer an injustice, the legal system and media will be sympathetic to their cause. Not all African Americans feel this way and thus depend on people like Sharpton and Jackson to provide the empathy and attention their situations call for.
I suspect if conservative Blacks actively worked to support causes of interest and importance to a wide spectrum of Black Americans, they would receive a modicum of respect for their work. Colin Powell is a Republican, but he has addressed the NAACP and has gone on the record as a strong supporter of affirmative action. I would state that Powell is respected, if not embraced, by a large segment of the African American community. Compare his words with those of Condoleeza Rice, who as provost of Stanford no doubt embraced affirmative action as a competitive advantage in attracting the best students of color to her campus. She doesn’t make a bold, decisive statement on the issue as Powell does. I would argue that Rice is not as respected for her commitment to the African American community as Powell is.
On the other hand, I’ve seen folks like Steele and J.C. Watts wheeled out by the Republicans and used as “evidence” that the party embraces African Americans. They never, to my knowledge, challenge the party’s policies or history with African Americans. If they did, perhaps they would be at least respected as “Black enough.”
Wow, sounds like you’re a busy person with all that cultural actualization going on. Did anyone ever tell you that you weren’t black enough?
I suspect, brickbacon, that when it comes to actual policies, and to a question of which African Americans best represent black interests, i’m probably much closer to you on this issue than to Renob. In fact, i find many of Renob’s statements in this thread to be extremely problematic.
But, that said, i’m not quite sure where your strategy of political debate leads us. It seems to deny even the possibility of whites and blacks talking to each other about these issues, and arriving at conclusions reached in good faith and mutual respect. Now, i’ll readily concede that good faith is often lacking (on both sides) in debates like this, but we ought to work on the basis that it is possible, and it seems to me that your assertions make that very difficult.
I make no claim to any special understanding of black culture. Hell, not only am i white, but i’ve only lived in the United States for five years. And i take your point about not wanting merely to work within or accept a white standard. I also accept that for you, the black aesthetic is inextricably tied to questions of ethics and collective consciousness.
Where i begin to have a problem is your implication that these connections that you draw are universal, that they do (or at least should) apply to all blacks. You seem to assume that it is necessary for all African Americans to place this particular collective consciousness and black identity first, to give it primacy above all other categories. Are you arguing that if they don’t then they somehow lack a genuine “blackness,” a genuine claim to their own notion of black identity?
I’m not familiar with Neal’s work, but it seems to me to be rather restrictive, stultifying and, ultimately, dictatorial. Sure, if this sense of the collective, and rejection or dissolution of the individual are what being black means for you, if they are what feed your sense of self (is this notion even possible under Neal’s formula?), and if they form a crucial part of your identity, then i’m not going to gainsay or devalue that. But what about those who choose a different sort of personal identity, who choose to honor their ancestors and revere their sufferings in a different way than you? Are those people simply to be cast out, rejected as inauthentic or a sell-out?
Which brings us to your next paragraph:
I understand your interpretation of the accusation of being a sell-out, and i think that when this accusation is made, the reasons behind it are often the ones you state. Those who accuse black Republicans like Michael Steele of being a sell-out do, indeed, often make the case he is failing in his responsibilities not simply as a legislator, but specifically as a black person and a representative of his people.
The main problem that i have with this argument is that it leaves no room for reasonable people to disagree on whether there might, in fact, be more than a single way of representing black people and giving them a voice in the corridors of power and in American society. It also tends to assume that a black elected official has an obligation to black people that transcends his or her obligation to all of his or her constituents. While i understand that the multitude of past injustices makes it quite reasonable to call for black leaders who have an interest in representing black people specifically, i wonder whether maintaining this sort of separatism is tenable in the long run, or whether it might end up exacerbating the very problems it aims to eliminate.
Don’t get me wrong, i have plenty of problems with Michael Steele’s politics, and i fervently hope that his run for the US Senate ends in defeat. I also take your points about black leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, whom i believe to be far more beneficial than many of their detractors would like to believe. But i think that your rather absolutist position cuts off avenues of potential dialog and mutual understanding between different groups, both racial and political. You also seem to assume that black “sell-outs” don’t even have the interests of their people at heart, whereas it seems to me that a more reasonable interpretation is that they simply have a different idea of how the interests of their people might best be served. I disagree with nearly all of Michael Steele’s politics, and i would never vote for him, but i believe that he probably arrived at his politics out of a genuine belief that they are the best policies for the people he hopes to represent, including Maryland’s black community.
Let me ask you this: I’m a white guy who doesn’t even really understand what the black aesthetic (as you describe it) is, let alone embrace it. I wouldn’t presume to count myself among the collective consciousness of African Americans. Yet, at the same, time, i agree with many of your political positions, i support most of the same black politicians that you support, and i oppose most of the black politicians that you oppose.
If i agree with your politics, and your sense of which black leaders have the best solutions, but i’m not black and can’t be part of the black aesthetic, then where am i in all this? Am i merely irrelevant? Does my opinion not matter at all, whether my politics are similar to your or diametrically opposed? Is my fundamental inability to comprehend the “black experience” a disqualifying factor in any discussion such as this one?
I’m not asking this out of some sense of wounded pride or egotism. I’m just interested in how you determine whther or not someone is worth engaging in these very important debates.
Well, i can’t speak for Renob, but i’m certainly not interested in making any claim for race as a biological category. Nor am i interested in calling you a racist. I’m simply interested in whether you have thought through some of the potential consequences of what seems to me to be a rather restrictive view of how this debate should be conducted, and who is and is not a valid participant.
Hippy, I thought you did a better job actually defending my opinions than explaining where you and I disagree.
Here’s where I get off claiming African Americans are poor, working class and non property owners.
Here’s where I get off claiming Clarence Thomas doesn’t represent the views of American blacks.
This book, and several of the ones listed below it, delineates the growing conservativism in the African-American middle class.
I do occassionally have facts at my disposal, folks.
Cite, schmite.
That’s presupposing that AA is a good thing, which I doubt very much.