It’s not quite this simple. There are plenty of black families that didn’t want to live in areas that had lots of riots either, but there were significant barriers, due to various policies and practices, both formal and informal, to black families moving to those “safer” areas. If those white families that fled to those areas either supported these policies and practices or refrained from opposing them, then they deserve some share of the blame for the ramifications of their continuing existence.
Good, but then why did you answer k9b’s question “their toxic culture”?
Why are these parts of “black culture”? They’re not problems of the culture of all black people, right? So why are these negative behaviors associated with “black”, in your mind? And why have you totally ignored things like the fact that many, many fewer unmarried black women have babies now than in the past? Isn’t that a very positive thing, and a sign that whatever the causes are, things have improved significantly in the last 50 years? Why would the fact that married black women are having even fewer babies (thus giving a percentage of ~70 or whatever for births unmarried vs married) affect our view of this fact?
When you associate negative things with “black”, rather than, say, “inner city Chicago gang culture”, or other very specific cultures that might actually and factually encourage harmful behaviors, then it directly implies that for someone to have an authentically black culture that means they must have a toxic culture. Does “blacker” = “toxic”, as far as culture is concerned? If not, then why are those negative things associated with “black”, rhetorically speaking? They don’t have to be. You could say there’s a problem with inner city gangs, or describe it in many different ways that don’t indict the culture of millions, most of whom aren’t involved in these negative behaviors.
IMO your rhetoric about black culture is in direct conflict with this assertion. IMO it sends a direct message to any black people that would read it that to be authentically black – and to embrace black culture – requires embracing toxicity and dysfunction.
There’s nothing wrong with being black. There’s nothing wrong with having a black culture. Those are very important messages that black children should receive, right, just as it’s important that black children be taught (as most are) to behave responsibly, with kindness, act respectfully, etc.? These things aren’t in conflict, and IMO your rhetoric makes them in conflict, making life far more difficult for black kids who might be delivered this message.
It’s awfully hard to talk about such complex concepts as “culture”, especially a shifting and alternately mixed and separated culture of millions of people spread out over a huge country, with simplistic terminology. Thus it’s extremely important that we don’t throw around rhetoric that could make things worse for children, IMO, which would include such a simplistic (and inaccurate) characterization as that culture of millions is toxic and dysfunctional. In reality, there are poor behaviors among individuals that belong to any and all cultures, and statistical variations in the commonality of these behaviors are caused by a huge variety of factors that are extremely difficult to define simply. Simply saying “toxic culture” reeks, IMO, of the desire to simply wash your hands and proclaim that you have no involvement, and no responsibility, in any way at all, for making things better.
There’s so much in this Coleman Hughes piece that’s relevant to this discussion, I can’t quote it all, so just have to exhort you all to read the whole thing. But here’s a representative taste:
(ETA: Sounds like a direct response to Andy’s post directly above mine.)
(Let’s also note that another dubious aspect of the BLM movement is that a randomly selected black person is an order of magnitude more likely to kill a white person this year than a randomly selected white person is to kill a black person.)
Lots more (richly deserved) criticism of TNC at the link.
I’ve always understood that main reason black people were prevented from leaving the inner city because they didn’t have the resources to do so.
Can you point out some of these policies/practices you mentioned? I’m aware of redlining, but this is a thing that denies services/benefits to people living in certain areas; AFAIK, it’s not a thing that keeps people from leaving those areas if they already have the means to do so.
Redlining and neigborhood covenants are examples of the formal policies/practices, but there were lots of informal ones too – for example, realtors steering black clients towards certain neighborhoods, and being less likely to show them houses in white neighborhoods, then that can have an effect. Or bank officers sometimes treating black families looking for loans differently from white families, regardless of redlining policies. As well as the many other policies and practices that resulted in it being much more difficult for black families to build the wealth necessary to relocate.
Sounds like tons of straw manning. TNC and most progressives have spoken many times of the progress made. TNC talks about President Grant, reconstruction, the Civil Rights movement, and much, much more, very frequently. If Hughes and you aren’t aware of this, then he and you are truly ignorant of TNC’s writings.
And that BLM fact you mention is just a result of population differences. An average individual black person is also significantly more likely to be killed by a white person than an average individual white person is by a black person, because there are lots more white people than black people. Statistically, an individual black person has far more reason to be afraid of white people than a white person does of black people, because population size differences overwhelm the differences in criminal statistical disparities. This has been brought up in previous threads, I’m pretty sure, and I’ll look for a cite when I’m able.
The shitty straw-manning you highlight in Hughes writing (seriously – none of those characterizations of supposed liberal/progressive arguments in the passages you quoted are made by me, TNC, or anyone but fringe people on the left) makes me less interested in reading more of it. I even started a thread a little while back on the very interesting fact that black girls/women generally perform the same in terms of income as white women with the same parental income, while black boys/men on average earn much, much lower incomes than white men with the same parental income, meaning that there’s something about how black men and boys, but not black women and girls, are treated by and interacting with broader society that is greatly skewing the statistics with regards to future earnings based on parental income as children.
Your title indicated that it was the punishing reach of racism causing it. You also wrote
which are all something that suggests in my eyes you are a fringe person on the left (when I see you push far greater demands for using language to describe the complexity of a social phenomenon elsewhere), albeit limited to this topic and a fringe that perhaps is growing in an activist influenced, tribal climate.
So what?
Citing Nate Silver marks me as a “fringe person on the left”? LOL.
Please learn to properly quote and cite posts from other threads, by the way. It’s very easy – just click the “quote” button like any response, and copy and paste the section from that into the thread in which you’re having the discussion in which you want to reference that other thread.
Because of Shodan 's Law - if they didn’t read it the first time, posting it again doesn’t help.
If I post “black people aren’t inferior; their culture is toxic” and you read it as “you are saying black people are inferior” nothing can be done.
Because black people as a group disproportionately behave in that way, which is the source of most of their disproportionate disadvantage.
Come on now, don’t be stupid. Basketball is part of US black culture - do you think that makes every black person in the US Michael Jordan?
I have addressed this twice already, and you didn’t read it.
No, I am not going to repost it - it doesn’t do any good.
Not to anyone with any sense. This idea of “authentic” black culture is coming from you. I don’t give a shit if dropping out of school, or abandoning your children, or robbing stores, is “authentic” or not. Just fucking stop doing it, and especially stop making excuses for it or blaming it on white people.
Again - fuck “authentic”. I am not the one saying “acting white” is not “authentic”. That would be you who’s saying it.
So stop doing it - you are making things worse.
Regards,
Shodan
I quoted your response to k9b’s question. I didn’t leave anything out. He asked why you thought they were inferior, and you answered “their toxic culture”. You didn’t say “they’re not inferior, but they have a toxic culture”.
No, I read your answer that black people are inferior because of “their toxic culture” as you answering that toxic culture was the reason you believed they are inferior. I get now that you don’t think that they are inferior, but you directly responded to a question of “why are they inferior?” with “their toxic culture”.
Here is the entire question again:
“Now, you keep saying that black people are inferior, but you then try to say that if isn’t because of their skin color, but some other nebulous thing. What is that nebulous thing that you think makes black people inferior? Identify that, and then we can determine if your reasons for thinking that black people are inferior are racists or not.”
And here is your entire answer to that question: “Their toxic culture, which perpetuates their situation instead of encouraging them to overcome it. Try reading for comprehension, you preposterous buffoon.”
I didn’t leave anything out in your answer to that question about why black people are inferior. That you’ve said conflicting things in other posts doesn’t mean you didn’t post what you posted in this particular post. I accept that you don’t believe black people are inferior, but that directly conflicts with the way you answered this particular question from k9b.
Black people in America in the late 18th century were much more likely to be transported by ship under abominable conditions than white people. Was sailing and poor hygiene part of American black culture in the 1790s? Black people were far more likely to be lynched in the 1920s than white people. Was hanging from trees by the neck part of American black culture in the 1920s?
Or were these things that were part of the interactions and complexities of broader society, and not intrinsically borne out of “black culture”? I think the latter, as I think those disparities are today.
There’s a lot of overlap between basketball and black culture, but that’s far too simplistic a characterization, IMO.
I’ve read every one of your posts in this thread. Just because I disagree doesn’t mean I didn’t read it. You have opinions, and I disagree with many of them. That’s what this discussion is – a series of conflicting opinions. You’re not speaking 100% verifiable fact that I’m ignoring – we’re interpreting a series of shared assumptions and facts very differently.
I appreciate when we can have a nuanced and thoughtful conversation. Simply saying “you didn’t read it” when I disagree with your opinion is not thoughtful, and I think you’re capable of a better level of discussion than this.
I’m not saying this, but I agree that this is making things worse. So I’ll again reiterate that you should not imply, as IMO you have been doing, that there is anything fundamentally “black” about criminal behavior, or single motherhood, or lack of education, or any other negative characteristic. These things are present in every single culture. They’re not unique to black communities, and they’re not ubiquitous among black communities. There’s no good reason to rhetorically associate them with “black culture” (statistical disparities are no better reasons than they were for lynching and enslavement), and many good reasons not to do so, chiefly that it could send the message to black children that in order to be “black” they must behave in certain negative ways.
Further – single motherhood has been improving, statistically, among black Americans for 50 years or more. Single motherhood has been worsening, statistically, among white Americans for 50 years or more. The disparity used to be very large: The math on Black out of wedlock births - The Atlantic
In 1970, the ratio of unmarried black births per capita to unmarried white births was 7 to 1. In 2009 it was less than 2 to 1. On a per capita basis, unmarried births for black women have been going down, while unmarried births for white women have been going up, for decades.
So you’re spending this time criticizing the supposed toxicity of a culture for a statistic about black women that has been improving steadily for several decades, and ignoring any negative connotation for a statistic about white women that has been getting worse for several decades. If you’re correct, and “toxic culture” is to blame for unmarried births among black women, then this “toxic culture” has been improving for 50 years, while the culture of white women has been getting worse over the same time.
So if “culture” is to blame for single motherhood, then black culture has been getting better for 50 years, factually speaking. There are fewer single mothers among black women, per capita, than ever before in measured American history.
I get that these things existed. But how much awareness of these things do you think there was among average white folk? No doubt the racist loan officer and his minions knew what they were up to, but do you think that the average white family - say, a line worker for Ford, with his wife and kids - fleeing areas of racial violence had any idea what racist loan officers were doing? Do you think he had any idea that realtors were steering black families away from predominantly white neighborhoods?
FWIW, I hadn’t even heard of racial steering in real estate until the mid-2000s, and I hadn’t heard of redlining until the 2008.
Probably not a ton of awareness, but IMO that’s not really a justification. It doesn’t mean these folks were moral monsters – they were just regular people – but regular people still deserve some share of the blame if they remained ignorant of extreme injustice around them when it was pretty easy to discover. And extreme ignorance would have been pretty rare, IMO – more common, I think, was a simple desire to avoid rocking the boat, and avoid any contentiousness, even when they witnessed an official or business person asserting or doing something racist. When white supremacism is in the every day fabric of society, it becomes normal, and it’s relatively hard to challenge something that’s “normal”… though that’s no excuse for not doing so.
Just as an example – every white Alabaman who rode the bus in the early to mid 20th century (and the vast majority who didn’t) was aware that black people were required by policy to sit in the back of the bus, and get up if a white person needed a seat. They weren’t ignorant of that policy – most just chose to tolerate or support it. There were tons of things like this that may have been more subtle than this policy, but still were very common, and very few could credibly say they had no knowledge of. Everyone was aware of segregated schools, and very few could credibly say that they didn’t know that the quality of those schools was very different. Etc.
Specifically, you have it (whether unwittingly or disingenuously, I can’t say) exactly backward when you say my statement of statistical probability is “just a result of population differences”, when in fact it is your framing that can only be technically accurate for that reason. The fact is that a far greater percentage of blacks than whites are murderers. And if a randomly selected black person and a randomly selected white person are approaching each other in a dark alley, the white person has more than ten times the reason to fear losing their life as a result of the encounter.
That’s great. The dramatic improvements for African Americans over recent decades are exactly what Jon Chait and Coleman Hughes are attempting to highlight in the face of doom and gloom from the left. So it’s good to see you acknowledge some of it, but I’m sure you will go back to taking the opposite tack when it suits you.
Simple question for you:
Do you believe that people, in the aggregate, behave rationally? Basically, do you think people respond to incentives?
Let’s say an individual bear is 10 times as likely to kill you as an individual hyena. Would you rather be locked in a cage with 1 bear or 20 hyenas?
There are disparities in various criminal statistics. I’ve never denied this. By itself this provides no information about society. Along with the history of the country, and statistical data on shootings, documents like the Ferguson Report, and many, many more pieces of data, it’s entirely reasonable to be critical of various forms of institutional biases that make many aspects of achievement more difficult for black Americans.
You and Hughes can go on slaying that straw man, over and over again. Shows great strength, certainly, taking down men of straw.
The reality is that I’m going to spend my time around roughly the same total number of animals (people) either way, and it really just comes down to the proportion of each. Therefore I would take as high a ratio as possible of “hyenas” if avoiding murder is my top goal (there may of course be other considerations since the risk is small overall).
Keep in mind that the last time we tangled on this issue, it didn’t end well for you. But hey, knock yourself out.
Be still, my beating heart! Big strong man argues with someone who made a mistake once in the past, and he keeps bringing it up, over and over again… ooh, I’m getting chills just thinking about it!
It’s not a straw man. On this very thread (or maybe one of the other two with the same usual suspects), I was accused of painting a Pollyannaish picture where everything is “peachy keen” for blacks.
As for the criminal statistics, you recited some pablum but didn’t engage with BLM. Hughes links to three analyses showing that there are no racial disparities in unjustified police shootings, which was new information to me. More broadly, the usual right wing critics of BLM have focused on the wrong point of emphasis when they counter with “all lives matter” or “blue lives matter” (I tend to agree with Bill Maher that if you take a job as a cop, you have to accept that your own safety cannot be the primary factor in how you deal with suspects). The more relevant objection is the clear intended implication that black lives are treated as expendable, that decent law abiding black families have to hunker down and live in fear that whites have declared open season on them. The statistics simply do not support this narrative,* and I suspect most who support BLM actually do not know this.
*There are certainly famous cases of horrific police brutality that do seem to support it, but if you think a small anecdotal sample of YouTube videos can substitute for carefully analyzed data, you’d better brace yourself because the alt-right has plenty of videos they can show as well.
There’s very little data available nationally on police shootings. Most departments don’t share their shooting data. I’ve started threads about how what little data there is shows that young black men are 21 times more likely to be shot by cops than young white men, despite only being 6-9 times as likely to be convicted of murder. Considering the shittiness of Hughes’ analysis that you’ve quoted so far, I’m not terribly interested into getting further into his thoughts.
The statistics absolutely do show this as reasonable. I’ve cited it multiple times – polling shows that 50% of black people report that they personally have experienced mistreatment by police, as compared to 3% of white people. Unless you think that black people are more likely to lie or be inaccurate about mistreatment (and historically, black people as a group have literally always been correct about their mistreatment), this shows that it’s entirely reasonable for many decent black people to see police as erratic at best, and dangerous foes at worst.