Full Version: Blacks Won't Integrate!
QUOTE(lordhelmet)
The "solution" that you are looking for is fundamental. It's the replacement of a failed sub-culture that allows:
1. A 70%+ out of wedlock birth rate.
2. The glamorizing of criminal behavior and of gangsta's.
3. The mentality that law enforcement are the bad guys.
4. A disdain for and a low priority placed on education.
5. A broken family structure (due to #1) and a low priority placed on fatherhood.
6. An acceptance of drug use and drug dealing.
7. The insistence on using non-standard patterns of communication and dress.
8. The resistance against assimilation into the broader American culture.
You fix the cultural problems and the statistics you referenced above will fix themselves. Your post has the cause-effects reversed. So does affirmative action.
"Black people" are under-represented because of the cultural/behavioral factors identified above.
1. A 70%+ out of wedlock birth rate.
2. The glamorizing of criminal behavior and of gangsta's.
3. The mentality that law enforcement are the bad guys.
4. A disdain for and a low priority placed on education.
5. A broken family structure (due to #1) and a low priority placed on fatherhood.
6. An acceptance of drug use and drug dealing.
7. The insistence on using non-standard patterns of communication and dress.
8. The resistance against assimilation into the broader American culture.
You fix the cultural problems and the statistics you referenced above will fix themselves. Your post has the cause-effects reversed. So does affirmative action.
"Black people" are under-represented because of the cultural/behavioral factors identified above.
QUOTE(aevans176)
There is no way to quantify the cultural differences that people often time relate to "professionalism". For instance, hair styles, speech patterns, and style of dress, etc are often things that relate themselves to perception. These are areas in which black people have created cultural divisions, partly out of necessity and partly just out of cultural differentiation.
QUOTE(Cephus)
Exactly. I think it's funny that blacks spend so much time wanting to be 'equal' and just as much time trying to be different. They've invented a 'black culture' and do their best to act different from whites, then they complain because they get treated differently.
Duh. Figure it out.
I think it's funny that blacks, and to a lesser degree hispanics, point their fingers and claim racism when asians have far less problem integrating into society because they actually TRY to fit in.
Duh. Figure it out.
I think it's funny that blacks, and to a lesser degree hispanics, point their fingers and claim racism when asians have far less problem integrating into society because they actually TRY to fit in.
QUOTE(Tim-Mello)
James Baldwin said it best, he said that it's not the responsibility of the white majority to realize that blacks are a minority, it's the other way around.
Like any situation, people who can adapt and are less "stuborn" tend to succeed. Hispanics who are here long enough and assimimulate are simply "white people" with names that end in vowels and the letter Z.
Black folks in America are rare because they indeed, after 100s of years, have their own culture. Just about every other race/nationality that has come to the USA melds into American "white" culture. If you ever look at polls and surveys, blacks are typically the odd race out.
Assimilation. That's what needs to be done and it starts with those who can change it (see James Baldwin).[...]The "black culture" (another lazy term, but for lack of a better one I'll use it) is one that does all it can to separate itself from the norms. Is there a white impoverished culture? Do they make up new words and new clothes? Do they frown on the efforts that it takes to be successful in our country?
Like any situation, people who can adapt and are less "stuborn" tend to succeed. Hispanics who are here long enough and assimimulate are simply "white people" with names that end in vowels and the letter Z.
Black folks in America are rare because they indeed, after 100s of years, have their own culture. Just about every other race/nationality that has come to the USA melds into American "white" culture. If you ever look at polls and surveys, blacks are typically the odd race out.
Assimilation. That's what needs to be done and it starts with those who can change it (see James Baldwin).[...]The "black culture" (another lazy term, but for lack of a better one I'll use it) is one that does all it can to separate itself from the norms. Is there a white impoverished culture? Do they make up new words and new clothes? Do they frown on the efforts that it takes to be successful in our country?
QUOTE(Amlord)
There is an interesting comparison between Native Americans and blacks here.
The Natives which choose to remain segregated from society (and keep their traditions, heritage, history) are left behind economically. The ones that integrate become a part of the larger society and benefit economically.
Similarly, when blacks choose to retain their heritage and refuse to integrate, the results are identical. Those who remain outside of mainstream society are left behind.
The Natives which choose to remain segregated from society (and keep their traditions, heritage, history) are left behind economically. The ones that integrate become a part of the larger society and benefit economically.
Similarly, when blacks choose to retain their heritage and refuse to integrate, the results are identical. Those who remain outside of mainstream society are left behind.
All of these posts suffer from differing degrees of the same insidious myth that is, unfortunately common in this country.
Better to simply ask the question and see if we have the fortitude to answer.
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
Is integration desirable?
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
Is integration desirable?
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
I am no expert here but when I was raised in east Texas, there were no blacks in my high school until after I graduated. There were only2 openly racist students there that I knew of.
My experience with blacks came in the Navy, and the first racist event I witnessed was several black sailors picking on another black sailor because his name was LeBlanc, which is french for white.
Over the years, the few blacks that I have worked with in technical fields made it plain that they could "fit in" at work, but after work they did not want to be recognized on the street if they were with their black friends. It would not be good for them to be seen as having white friends. One even use the term "cannibalistic" to describe the way other blacks tried to shame him out of getting an education. Another had his fiance dump him because he joined what she considered a white man's religion.
There is a culture problem, and not just with blacks. A friend's parents are long time educator in the native American school systems, and education is seen as making the red man into a white man by many of the tribal elders.
Refusing to assimilate is self destructive behavior, and even some whites manage to do the same thing. I know a white man who was disbarred, losing a very high paying career in the legal system because he openly and militanly despised the legal system. Fighting the system when it is not actively trying to hurt you is not very smart. Refusing to make something of yourself just because the rest of America is not actively trying to help you is not very smart either.
I'm not sure these questions really address the quotes you've provided as their justification turnea but I'll give tham a go...
If anything there seems to be an over representation of black people in America's culture... at least when compared to the, apparently larger, Hispanic group. The same can be said of the British as well with regards to the amount of black faces in British media culture as opposed to sub continental Indian/ asian.
The only real question here must be, what is the mainstream of America?
I would say that whom so ever the majority of Americans are, what ever their cultural heritage, then they are the mainstream of America and their views and morals are the mainstream views and morals of the USA.
One thing is for sure though, refering to oneself or one's ethnicity as being 'European', or 'African American', is a distortion of the truth. You are Americans' regardless of what colour skin you have or where your genes developed. Black people in America are not African any more than white people are European.
Live and let live. If black culture in the USA differs from the main stream, then so what? They (black people) are still subject to the same laws and taxes and thats all they have to respect. The rest... all the stuff about conforming to the mainstream ...is for them to decide upon.
I'm not aware of any obligation upon anyone to conform to anything and frankly, if they (the black people in the USA) had to conform, then the world would have lost out on a LOT of good music so I don't see the problem.
If a citizen breaks the law, then punish them. Otherwise, mind your own business.
QUOTE
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
I have no idea, but they are certainly well represented as being American to the rest of the world. If anything there seems to be an over representation of black people in America's culture... at least when compared to the, apparently larger, Hispanic group. The same can be said of the British as well with regards to the amount of black faces in British media culture as opposed to sub continental Indian/ asian.
QUOTE
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
It means what ever the majority of Americans say it does. Thats what a mainstream is.The only real question here must be, what is the mainstream of America?
QUOTE
Is integration desirable?
This is an invalid question. Integration is both desirable and undesirable depending on who you are and what you are being asked to integrate into... QUOTE
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
Exactly... what is the mainstream of America? I would say that whom so ever the majority of Americans are, what ever their cultural heritage, then they are the mainstream of America and their views and morals are the mainstream views and morals of the USA.
One thing is for sure though, refering to oneself or one's ethnicity as being 'European', or 'African American', is a distortion of the truth. You are Americans' regardless of what colour skin you have or where your genes developed. Black people in America are not African any more than white people are European.
QUOTE
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
They provide an alternative perspective on defining the culture. I wouldn't call it a 'role' though. Its not as if they were asked to do anything. Minorities exist because they just do. To describe them as having a 'role' puts a mistaken emphasis on their existence. Live and let live. If black culture in the USA differs from the main stream, then so what? They (black people) are still subject to the same laws and taxes and thats all they have to respect. The rest... all the stuff about conforming to the mainstream ...is for them to decide upon.
I'm not aware of any obligation upon anyone to conform to anything and frankly, if they (the black people in the USA) had to conform, then the world would have lost out on a LOT of good music so I don't see the problem.
If a citizen breaks the law, then punish them. Otherwise, mind your own business.
When I refer to black who refuse to enter the mainstream of society, I am talking about people who watch a Merrill Lynch commercial with a black couple talking about saving for their kids' college education and have the response "That isn't a black man" or "That isn't the kind of life I have".
The mainstream in America to me is living the American dream: succeeding through adversity, capitalizing on your strengths, and taking risk and creating opportunities. There will be always be those (of all races) who say that they cannot do something, either based upon where they were born or where they live or who their parents are. These are the people (of any race) who are left behind.
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
Blacks are increasingly integrating. They appear in TV commercials more and more in roles that would stereotypically be seen as "white", such as the college education example I gave.
Is integration desirable?
I think it is. Who wants to be left out of the larger group? I will admit that some do want that, but it is the exception rather than the rule. Most people want to fit it, get along, and succeed.
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
NO!! And here is where many people have a flawed view of the minority/majority relationship. As a majority absorbs a minority, it takes from that minority group the positive aspects of its culture. You see this already in the American pop culture, which is greatly influenced by black Americans. Which is why I can see moif saying that blacks are overrepresented: American pop culture is largely a black phenomenon. The "whites" have embraced it as something positive. They expand on it, promote it, and (ultimately) use it to make money.
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America"?
As I said, the minority's qualities are integrated into the whole. During the Middle Ages, when the Europeans established the Latin Kingdom in Palestine, they absorbed some key qualities of the local customs. In ancient Rome, the Romans took ideas from conquered areas and capitalized on them and made them better. The minority's influence occurs when their culture is adopted by the larger group. This is the melting pot of America.
The mainstream in America to me is living the American dream: succeeding through adversity, capitalizing on your strengths, and taking risk and creating opportunities. There will be always be those (of all races) who say that they cannot do something, either based upon where they were born or where they live or who their parents are. These are the people (of any race) who are left behind.
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
Blacks are increasingly integrating. They appear in TV commercials more and more in roles that would stereotypically be seen as "white", such as the college education example I gave.
Is integration desirable?
I think it is. Who wants to be left out of the larger group? I will admit that some do want that, but it is the exception rather than the rule. Most people want to fit it, get along, and succeed.
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
NO!! And here is where many people have a flawed view of the minority/majority relationship. As a majority absorbs a minority, it takes from that minority group the positive aspects of its culture. You see this already in the American pop culture, which is greatly influenced by black Americans. Which is why I can see moif saying that blacks are overrepresented: American pop culture is largely a black phenomenon. The "whites" have embraced it as something positive. They expand on it, promote it, and (ultimately) use it to make money.
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America"?
As I said, the minority's qualities are integrated into the whole. During the Middle Ages, when the Europeans established the Latin Kingdom in Palestine, they absorbed some key qualities of the local customs. In ancient Rome, the Romans took ideas from conquered areas and capitalized on them and made them better. The minority's influence occurs when their culture is adopted by the larger group. This is the melting pot of America.
turnea, these are extremely difficult to answer because of the inherent subjectivity of the questions, but I will try 
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
This is almost impossible to answer because there are so many facets of what defines 'integration'. To me, Blacks are integrated insofar as they have been "allowed" and insofar as time has permitted them to be. I think of assimilation when I think of integration, so I envision Blacks conforming to a dominant white culture, which I do not think is ideal. For example, Black standards of beauty are not 'integrated' into the mainstream. All one has to do is look at the Black women who've represented the country in Miss America and Miss USA to note that these women have a great deal of 'white' features. That's just one example off the top of my head (and I fear I used too many brain cells in the AA debate to address this properly right now
)
The relevant defition from Merriam Webster's online dictionary:
Are blacks seen as equals? My personal opinion is, no. Are blacks assimilated into society? In some ways yes (some cultural things), in some ways no.
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
To me, being integrated means being afforded the same opportunities as everyone else...having equal access to the means with which one can become "successful" and attain "the American dream" (so-to-speak).
Is integration desirable?
Yes and no. It's desireable from a 'success' standpoint. If you want to make your way in America without being looked down/frowned upon, it certainly helps to integrate/assimilate. It sure makes it easier to get ahead if you aren't "different". But if you want to retain your own cultural identity (or what you have left of it after 300+ years of slavery, still being treated as 'immoral' because of your sexual orientation, etc.), then integration/assimilation is not entirely desirable. It's desireable for the majority group of course.
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
In many ways it is, though I'd suggest that this is changing with our youth. The 'color lines' are not nearly as divided and drawn amongst the youth of today, which is extremely promising. But by in large, I'd say that what most people define as "American" is a white male dominated view.
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
Preferably a sizeable role. Minorities have been the backbone of this country and as such, their roles should be pronounced in defining what the country is all about. If you look globally at what the worldview is of "American culture", minorities don't have much of a role in what makes "mainstream America". And sometimes outsiders have a better grasp of what "America" is all about as they aren't as closely attached to and entrenched in the definitions (they have the ability to be more objective). That's my experience, anyway
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
This is almost impossible to answer because there are so many facets of what defines 'integration'. To me, Blacks are integrated insofar as they have been "allowed" and insofar as time has permitted them to be. I think of assimilation when I think of integration, so I envision Blacks conforming to a dominant white culture, which I do not think is ideal. For example, Black standards of beauty are not 'integrated' into the mainstream. All one has to do is look at the Black women who've represented the country in Miss America and Miss USA to note that these women have a great deal of 'white' features. That's just one example off the top of my head (and I fear I used too many brain cells in the AA debate to address this properly right now
)The relevant defition from Merriam Webster's online dictionary:
QUOTE
the act or process or an instance of integrating : as a : incorporation as equals into society or an organization of individuals of different groups (as races)
Are blacks seen as equals? My personal opinion is, no. Are blacks assimilated into society? In some ways yes (some cultural things), in some ways no.
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
To me, being integrated means being afforded the same opportunities as everyone else...having equal access to the means with which one can become "successful" and attain "the American dream" (so-to-speak).
Is integration desirable?
Yes and no. It's desireable from a 'success' standpoint. If you want to make your way in America without being looked down/frowned upon, it certainly helps to integrate/assimilate. It sure makes it easier to get ahead if you aren't "different". But if you want to retain your own cultural identity (or what you have left of it after 300+ years of slavery, still being treated as 'immoral' because of your sexual orientation, etc.), then integration/assimilation is not entirely desirable. It's desireable for the majority group of course.
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
In many ways it is, though I'd suggest that this is changing with our youth. The 'color lines' are not nearly as divided and drawn amongst the youth of today, which is extremely promising. But by in large, I'd say that what most people define as "American" is a white male dominated view.
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
Preferably a sizeable role. Minorities have been the backbone of this country and as such, their roles should be pronounced in defining what the country is all about. If you look globally at what the worldview is of "American culture", minorities don't have much of a role in what makes "mainstream America". And sometimes outsiders have a better grasp of what "America" is all about as they aren't as closely attached to and entrenched in the definitions (they have the ability to be more objective). That's my experience, anyway
QUOTE(Amlord @ Jun 21 2005, 01:10 PM)
When I refer to black who refuse to enter the mainstream of society, I am talking about people who watch a Merrill Lynch commercial with a black couple talking about saving for their kids' college education and have the response "That isn't a black man" or "That isn't the kind of life I have".
...and here indeed lies the problem. Namely, who are these people and where do they live?
In all the days of my life (as far as that goes) I haven't met one black person who fills that description and I have had discussions on race with black people from widely ranging backgrounds in this country.
The question I asked was tough but the answer (subjective as it may be I acknowledge) is dreadfully important.
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
..about what proportion of the black population do you imagine scorn success?
QUOTE(Amlord)
The mainstream in America to me is living the American dream: succeeding through adversity, capitalizing on your strengths, and taking risk and creating opportunities. There will be always be those (of all races) who say that they cannot do something, either based upon where they were born or where they live or who their parents are. These are the people (of any race) who are left behind.
..again its like we live in totally different worlds because I don't know any black person who doesn't strive to succeed because they perceive the deck as stacked against them.
In fact the opposite is true. My parents taught me that as a black man I would have to work harder and smarter than my white peers to achieve equal success.
The idea of racism was used as motivator and I will inform you that this is the case in the vast majority of black homes, churches, and institutions I know.
I didn't grow up anywhere special I was born in Huntsville and raised in the Birmingham Area neither are exactly the "Black Mecca."
Where are these 'cannibalistic" discouraged black people and why is it so often assumed they make up a significant percentage of blacks in America?
I attended Cleveland public schools for 4 years during grade school/middle school and one year of high school. What I saw then were kids who were primarily motivated by...I don't know what. It wasn't graduating, it wasn't looking forward to college. They seemed to be motivated by "getting by". Perhaps this was more of a class thing rather than a race thing, but 80% of the school were black, less than 15% were minority (i.e. white).
Contrast this to when I started attending a Catholic high school. The expectations there were astronomically higher. The expectation was that kids were going to college. Although not everyone from my high school went to college, the vast majority did. The difference in attitudes from everyone involved (from the kids, to the teachers to the administrators) could not have been more different.
Again, I don't know if this is a class issue or a race issue, but the two seemed linked. I do know that I come from a lower middle class family and being in the high school environment I had influenced my life for the positive. Things were expected of me: I couldn't just skate by (as I had in public school).
For one thing, I had to attend school. In public school, there were no questions asked if you missed school until you reached the maximum number of days in a quarter (back then it was 9 days, or 1 per week). I used that rule to miss exactly one day per week. When I tried that in my new school, I was suspended for truancy. Two Saturdays of writing the student handbook for eight hours taught me quickly that things were different.
How exactly is this related to race, and specifically to race integration? The kids in the public school were just like all other kids: some were bullies, some were thugs, but mostly they were just kids. What they lacked was a drive to be something, to do something. As I look back, I can only blame the parents and the home environment of those students. I look at my own home and the lack of motivation provided there. The lack of making sure that one has goals and is working to achieve those goals.
Is it a black-white thing or a rich-poor thing? Heck if I know. All I know at this point is that without a college education, you cannot get ahead in this country (reliably). And without a family environment that encourages kids to go to college and to succeed, kids will find it hard to succeed in this country.
As a black man, turnea, if you do not know one black person who doesn't think about college for their kids, then perhaps you are the lucky one. Perhaps your entire community of Huntsville is "integrated". All I know is that in the inner city (which is what most people think of when they think of the black community) these things are not thought of in my experience. That needs to change.
Contrast this to when I started attending a Catholic high school. The expectations there were astronomically higher. The expectation was that kids were going to college. Although not everyone from my high school went to college, the vast majority did. The difference in attitudes from everyone involved (from the kids, to the teachers to the administrators) could not have been more different.
Again, I don't know if this is a class issue or a race issue, but the two seemed linked. I do know that I come from a lower middle class family and being in the high school environment I had influenced my life for the positive. Things were expected of me: I couldn't just skate by (as I had in public school).
For one thing, I had to attend school. In public school, there were no questions asked if you missed school until you reached the maximum number of days in a quarter (back then it was 9 days, or 1 per week). I used that rule to miss exactly one day per week. When I tried that in my new school, I was suspended for truancy. Two Saturdays of writing the student handbook for eight hours taught me quickly that things were different.
How exactly is this related to race, and specifically to race integration? The kids in the public school were just like all other kids: some were bullies, some were thugs, but mostly they were just kids. What they lacked was a drive to be something, to do something. As I look back, I can only blame the parents and the home environment of those students. I look at my own home and the lack of motivation provided there. The lack of making sure that one has goals and is working to achieve those goals.
Is it a black-white thing or a rich-poor thing? Heck if I know. All I know at this point is that without a college education, you cannot get ahead in this country (reliably). And without a family environment that encourages kids to go to college and to succeed, kids will find it hard to succeed in this country.
As a black man, turnea, if you do not know one black person who doesn't think about college for their kids, then perhaps you are the lucky one. Perhaps your entire community of Huntsville is "integrated". All I know is that in the inner city (which is what most people think of when they think of the black community) these things are not thought of in my experience. That needs to change.
QUOTE(Amlord @ Jun 21 2005, 03:51 PM)
As a black man, turnea, if you do not know one black person who doesn't think about college for their kids, then perhaps you are the lucky one. Perhaps your entire community of Huntsville is "integrated". All I know is that in the inner city (which is what most people think of when they think of the black community) these things are not thought of in my experience. That needs to change.
This is pure world of mouth but a lot of people familiar with Huntsville call it one of the most segregated cities remaining in the south.
Birmingham is a bit better on that note.
When blacks talk about integration (as opposed to segregation) they tend to talk about schooling and housing.
Although I wasn't raised in the inner city (not to much of an inner city in Alabama except Birmingham and even there we exaggerate
) I have plenty of friends and relatives who were (Chicago and New York mainly). I know of very few parents who don't intend college for their kids.
I know of none who don't want success for themselves and their children.
That doesn't mean the kids always get there, but it is my experience that most children in general suffer from a lack of direction and that it is certainly higher in children with no easily accessible role models for education.
My parents caught the tale end of the Jim Crow south coming up and institutionalized racism caused a dearth of education success among blacks.
The effects of this still linger, a significant fraction of the people I go the college with are the first in their families to attend.
This does not equate to a problem with black culture or blacks "refusing to integrate."
I'd like to know just where that complaint has its roots.
[quote=turnea,Jun 21 2005, 04:48 PM]
Is integration desirable? [/quote]
Absolutely. That doesn't mean that one has to be a carbon copy of everyone else, certainly there is room for differences between people. America is the Great Melting Pot, it's a mix of cultures and peoples and ideas, but it didn't get that way by having people who refused to mix.
Unfortunately, as others have correctly noted, those people who refuse to mix are the same ones who are being left behind economically. I think it's a shame, in the black community especially, that community leaders are the ones decrying success as somehow betraying your race. A successful black male has gone "Uncle Tom" and should be rejected, while apparently, breeding uncontrollably, rejecting education and being a criminal is something to be aspired to for blacks.
Why haven't they lynched these leaders? They are the worst thing that could possibly happen to the black community![/quote]
Is integration desirable? [/quote]
Absolutely. That doesn't mean that one has to be a carbon copy of everyone else, certainly there is room for differences between people. America is the Great Melting Pot, it's a mix of cultures and peoples and ideas, but it didn't get that way by having people who refused to mix.
Unfortunately, as others have correctly noted, those people who refuse to mix are the same ones who are being left behind economically. I think it's a shame, in the black community especially, that community leaders are the ones decrying success as somehow betraying your race. A successful black male has gone "Uncle Tom" and should be rejected, while apparently, breeding uncontrollably, rejecting education and being a criminal is something to be aspired to for blacks.
Why haven't they lynched these leaders? They are the worst thing that could possibly happen to the black community![/quote]
QUOTE(Cephus @ Jun 22 2005, 03:45 PM)
I think it's a shame, in the black community especially, that community leaders are the ones decrying success as somehow betraying your race. A successful black male has gone "Uncle Tom" and should be rejected, while apparently, breeding uncontrollably, rejecting education and being a criminal is something to be aspired to for blacks.
Why haven't they lynched these leaders? They are the worst thing that could possibly happen to the black community!
Why haven't they lynched these leaders? They are the worst thing that could possibly happen to the black community!
OK, before this gets dangerous or out of control, there should be a parameter or two established here.
It has been contended by several that Blacks as a society are refusing integration into 'Mainstream' (whatever that is) culture.
It has been contended that Blacks:
-reject education,
-dress and speak differently as a culture,
-promote criminality as a culture,
-condemn sucessful blacks,
-promote uncontrolled breeding.
It has further been contended that there are Black community leaders that condone, nay promote the above contentions.
I think that before we debate this much further it might be wise for those who have made or support those contentions to present some evidence backing them up. They contentions seem somewhat counter-logical, and oin the face of it, it is possible that some might say the contentions themselves are bigoted.
Either way, before continuing, is there any evidence at all that any or all of these 'contentions' have any basis in reality?
QUOTE(Cephus @ Jun 22 2005, 10:45 AM)
Unfortunately, as others have correctly noted, those people who refuse to mix are the same ones who are being left behind economically. I think it's a shame, in the black community especially, that community leaders are the ones decrying success as somehow betraying your race.
I'm sure you have evidence of this, right?
Since when has any successful black leader ever claim success is betrayal of the black race?
QUOTE(Cephus)
A successful black male has gone "Uncle Tom" and should be rejected, while apparently, breeding uncontrollably, rejecting education and being a criminal is something to be aspired to for blacks.
..and what black leaders promote this view?
To say that even a significant fraction of blacks support such nonsense and that it is somehow part of black culture is a clearly false statement.
That said, the people who post it could at least try and back it up.
I agree with Vermillion on this account.. are we not confusing 'black leaders' with 'black rappers' or some other such loud group?
I know my exposure to the Black culture of America is limited but I personally have never seen any political leader of any skin tone or colour, ever advocate rejecting education or that being a criminal is something to be aspired to...
I have however seen and heard plenty of American entertainers, also white Americans, openly advocating a 'pimp' lifestyle or glorifying criminal culture. Such examples as the rapper Snoop Doggy Dog or the TV show: 'The Soprano's' spring to mind....
...and whilst I do agree that an abundence of such voices are black, I wouldn't characterise them as being 'leaders', though I do admit they have influence.
I know my exposure to the Black culture of America is limited but I personally have never seen any political leader of any skin tone or colour, ever advocate rejecting education or that being a criminal is something to be aspired to...
I have however seen and heard plenty of American entertainers, also white Americans, openly advocating a 'pimp' lifestyle or glorifying criminal culture. Such examples as the rapper Snoop Doggy Dog or the TV show: 'The Soprano's' spring to mind....
...and whilst I do agree that an abundence of such voices are black, I wouldn't characterise them as being 'leaders', though I do admit they have influence.
QUOTE(Vermillion @ Jun 22 2005, 10:53 AM)
It has been contended by several that Blacks as a society are refusing integration into 'Mainstream' (whatever that is) culture.
It has been contended that Blacks:
-reject education,
-dress and speak differently as a culture,
-promote criminality as a culture,
-condemn sucessful blacks,
-promote uncontrolled breeding.
It has further been contended that there are Black community leaders that condone, nay promote the above contentions.
It has been contended that Blacks:
-reject education,
-dress and speak differently as a culture,
-promote criminality as a culture,
-condemn sucessful blacks,
-promote uncontrolled breeding.
It has further been contended that there are Black community leaders that condone, nay promote the above contentions.
While I [B]completely disagree with many if not all of these statements, I will agree that often times black professionals and sucess stories are looked down upon by many other members of the black community, specifically if they are conservatives. For instance, Colin Powell;
http://www.blackcommentator.com/80/80_cover_haiti.html
What about my favorite Secretary of State?? Condeleeza Rice??
http://www.milwaukeecourier.org/news/Artic...ID=50917&sID=16
I also believe that often times that black people do differentiate themselves in reference to pop culture and attempt to speak differently/dress differently. I often think this has little to do with race, but more to do with pop culture in the black community. This can be illustrated by slang such as ebonics or clothing like FUBU (for us by us...).
In reference to language, a good book to read could be:
John R. RICKFORD 1992. "Grammatical variation and divergence in Vernacular Black English."
However, this can be said about any demographical segment in America. I don't know how much (if any) that black differentiation finds its way into the board room...
Finally, I think that black people as a whole don't promote criminality, but pop culture can be a culprit in this sense. If rap music glorifies selling drugs and shootings, it's easier for a child to find it acceptable. This can be said about drinking and Country music (trust me...!). Heck, 50 Cent was a known gang-banger, sold drugs, and has been shot. 50 Cent doesn't have interviews talking about how horrible his previous lifestyle was and to stay in school.
Sure, there are plenty of role-models that are wonderful. But, frankly, they're not on MTV and don't make it onto the radio or prime time cable....
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Jun 22 2005, 04:34 PM)
However, this can be said about any demographical segment in America. I don't know how much (if any) that black differentiation finds its way into the board room...
And I think that is the problem with those who made the 'contentions' above. Nobody is denying the existence of Gangsta' rap, nor the popularity of some of the artists associated with it. But that is a proportion of teens, both black and white, and is if anything a symbol of the amger of pop-culture on youth. It has little or no relevance to Blacks overall, and could easily be said to have far MORE relevance to modern youth over all, regardless of race.
QUOTE
Finally, I think that black people as a whole don't promote criminality, but pop culture can be a culprit in this sense. If rap music glorifies selling drugs and shootings, it's easier for a child to find it acceptable. This can be said about drinking and Country music (trust me...!).
...and about Britany Spears and drunken marriages, or any of a hundred boy-bands and drugs and priomiscuity. These issues have everything to do with the effect of pop-culture on teens, and NOTHING to do with race.
If somebody looked at Live8 lineup, noticing that a vast majority of the stars are white, and looking into their records and public statements, a lot of them have used drugs; would it be then fair to say that Whites promote drugs as a culture?
Of course not. So why is it acceptable to do the same for Blacks?
As I said, anyone who wants any of the above 'contentions' to stand as anything but fantasy needs to present at least SOME evidence to support them.
QUOTE(Cephus @ Jun 22 2005, 10:45 AM)
QUOTE(turnea @ Jun 21 2005, 04:48 PM)
Is integration desirable?
Absolutely. That doesn't mean that one has to be a carbon copy of everyone else, certainly there is room for differences between people. America is the Great Melting Pot, it's a mix of cultures and peoples and ideas, but it didn't get that way by having people who refused to mix.
Unfortunately, as others have correctly noted, those people who refuse to mix are the same ones who are being left behind economically. I think it's a shame, in the black community especially, that community leaders are the ones decrying success as somehow betraying your race. A successful black male has gone "Uncle Tom" and should be rejected, while apparently, breeding uncontrollably, rejecting education and being a criminal is something to be aspired to for blacks.
Why haven't they lynched these leaders? They are the worst thing that could possibly happen to the black community!
Right. Black community leaders feel that being successful betrays your race. Exactly. That's why the black community hates Puff Daddy. And Beyonce. And Michael Jordan. And Oprah. And especially Barrack Obama. We hate successful black people.
I think I know who you are referring to, because I've had this exact same conversation with a conservative friend of mine a few months ago. She asked me "why do black people hate successful black people?" I asked her who she was referring to, and her examples were Colin Powell, Condi Rice, and other conservative people of color.
There seems to be a memo circulating around certain conservative circles and think tanks that the reason black people dislike Condi Rice and Colin Powell is because they are "successful." I don't really know who came up with this conclusion, but I guarantee you that it's a white person who's personally interacted with less than five black people their entire life. Somehow, it's absolutely unfathomable to conservatives that black people, as a whole, simply don't agree with their politics. Generally speaking, we don't dislike Condi Rice any more than we dislike Bush 43. But since Condi is black, obviously there's a hidden meaning behind there somewhere, right???
If a white person hates Bush 43, who in their right mind is going to say it's because "they hate successful white people?" And who uses "breeding" in the context of talking about human beings?
Edited to add: Referring to "black leaders," I don't wish them any harm but nor do I pay particular attention to them. I did not elect them to represent me. No black person in America chose who the "black leaders" are.
And can someone please explain to me, for the life of me, what is white conservative males' obsession with gangster rap??? I don't understand it. There's Bill O' Reilly, then there's Zell Miller (who believes that when the Founding Fathers wrote about "freedom of speech," they wouldn't have included gangster rap had it existed at the time!), and there's several conservative white males on this board. Can you tell me just what it is about this style of music that makes it so dangerous?
And aevans had already brought up Condi Rice and Colin Powell. Note to self: it helps to review the entire topic. But now I'm more certain than ever there was a memo sent out about this, or at least a mass e-mail.
QUOTE(SuzySteamboat @ Jun 22 2005, 02:29 PM)
And can someone please explain to me, for the life of me, what is white conservative males' obsession with gangster rap??? I don't understand it.
As a sorta conservative white male, my obsession with gangster rap began with the my purchase of "Eazy Duz It" and continued through N.W.A., and its offshots like Ice Cube and Dr. Dre, plus protegé acts like The D.O.C. and even some Eminem. Big fan of 2Pac as well, and I liked a few of Ice-T's albums before he went rap / rock with cop killa. I think it's a combination of the beat, solid production and amusing, if occasionally violent lyrics. I think that gansta rap is played out, but then again Ludacris has killing and beat-downs in his songs and even Andre 3000 posed with a gun in the album art for Outkast.
Seriously, these white conservative males are against violent videogames, TV sex, Howard Stern and mainstreaming of porn. In general, they are against inappropriate material being marketed to kids. Like when you look at the MTV ratings being huge ages 12-17 and every song played has an 'advisory' sticker.
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Jun 22 2005, 12:34 PM)
Finally, I think that black people as a whole don't promote criminality, but pop culture can be a culprit in this sense. If rap music glorifies selling drugs and shootings, it's easier for a child to find it acceptable. This can be said about drinking and Country music (trust me...!). Heck, 50 Cent was a known gang-banger, sold drugs, and has been shot. 50 Cent doesn't have interviews talking about how horrible his previous lifestyle was and to stay in school.
Sure, there are plenty of role-models that are wonderful. But, frankly, they're not on MTV and don't make it onto the radio or prime time cable....
Sure, there are plenty of role-models that are wonderful. But, frankly, they're not on MTV and don't make it onto the radio or prime time cable....
Every day somewhere in America someone is playing "Rock n' Roll, Part II" by Gary Glitter. And every day that means someone has to cut a royalty check to a convicted consumer of child pornography.
I am not equating 50 Cent with Gary Glitter as good role models, but then again I don't know of too many popular musicians that should be. Or athletes. Or politicians. Could it be that that 50 Cent's primary purpose is to serve as bad example to others?
Suzy Steamboat and Turnea are both considerably younger than I am, but like them I never got a ballot to cast a vote for my "black leader." I don't HAVE any black leader. There are no more Martins or Malcolms in the pipeline. That caliber of leader comes along only once in a lifetime and once they're gone that's it.
The three "C's" frequently quoted by conservatives (Colin, Condoleeza and Clarence) as Black leaders other Blacks should look up to, respect and emulate are undermined by the fact that anyone endorsed by the likes of a Rush Limbaugh who has demonstrated nothing but indifference or hostility toward African-Americans, is going to get a good once over to see if their ghetto pass has been revoked.
Colin Powell can still get love from Black people even if the four years he spent carrying the water for George W. Bush didn't win him any points. Condoleeza Rice won a NAACP Image Award so she gets love for being "a credit to her race" but I think her supporters and detractors split right down the middle. Whether or not Condoleeza is down for the cause is still under review.
Clarence Thomas...well, if you can't say something nice...
Hey Suzy! Don't you think one of the reasons White conservatives are hatin' on gangsta rap so much is because their kids are lovin' it so much? Don't parents usually hate whatever their kids like?
I've been reading this thread with interest. I am a white male who grew up poor and within a counter-culture framework. Yet, I can only pretend to understand the implicit and explicit cultural biases I have observed against those folks who are not obviously white. From my observations, it is clear that there are many subtle biases against non-whites and in particular people of African extraction. I observe longer looks, watchful, distrustful eyes, stiffening of body language, crossing to the other side of the street. I have observed police profiling. I see preferential treatment at bars when ordering drinks. I see many little slights just in my observations. If I were black, I am sure I'd observe those slights repeated every day with frustrating regularity.
I have a good friend, a brilliant friend, expert in string theory AND loop quantum gravity, who has had a difficult time finding a professorship within a university. He will likely win the Nobel Prize; he is the most published physicist at his age; he has worked with all the current greats in the physics community. He is also black. Other people who are not even remotely as qualified as him somehow were given jobs preferentially. And I can say this with some degree of objectivity.
Yet, in the same vein, I live in San Francisco with the largest homeless/pan-handling community in the US. I get people asking me for money all the time. In particular, I get people who are black asking me for money because I am white. I know this because, when walking with friends who are black, I don't get pan-handled nearly as often. It is also easy observe that the homeless/pan-handlers are disproportionately black.
There is a division in this nation, but it is an insidious, subconscious division. There are many reasons for it, but it isn't because blacks won't integrate.
I have a good friend, a brilliant friend, expert in string theory AND loop quantum gravity, who has had a difficult time finding a professorship within a university. He will likely win the Nobel Prize; he is the most published physicist at his age; he has worked with all the current greats in the physics community. He is also black. Other people who are not even remotely as qualified as him somehow were given jobs preferentially. And I can say this with some degree of objectivity.
Yet, in the same vein, I live in San Francisco with the largest homeless/pan-handling community in the US. I get people asking me for money all the time. In particular, I get people who are black asking me for money because I am white. I know this because, when walking with friends who are black, I don't get pan-handled nearly as often. It is also easy observe that the homeless/pan-handlers are disproportionately black.
There is a division in this nation, but it is an insidious, subconscious division. There are many reasons for it, but it isn't because blacks won't integrate.
QUOTE(nighttimer @ Jun 23 2005, 08:28 AM)
Colin Powell can still get love from Black people even if the four years he spent carrying the water for George W. Bush didn't win him any points. Condoleeza Rice won a NAACP Image Award so she gets love for being "a credit to her race" but I think her supporters and detractors split right down the middle. Whether or not Condoleeza is down for the cause is still under review.
Clarence Thomas...well, if you can't say something nice...
Hey Suzy! Don't you think one of the reasons White conservatives are hatin' on gangsta rap so much is because their kids are lovin' it so much? Don't parents usually hate whatever their kids like?
Clarence Thomas...well, if you can't say something nice...
Hey Suzy! Don't you think one of the reasons White conservatives are hatin' on gangsta rap so much is because their kids are lovin' it so much? Don't parents usually hate whatever their kids like?
I enjoy the sentiment from black people in reference to Colin Powell. Contrary to your "Colin Powell can still get love..." comment, many black Americans have a negative opinion of the man; regardless of the fact that he was born to poor immigrants, is a decorated war hero, was a decorated military leader, testified at the Iran-Contra hearings, and helped lead the war in Iraq. What an awful portion of the Black community...
(sorry, but I just will never understand it)Condeleeza won an NAACP award because she's a forthright and upstanding part of the American society. The funny thing, is sometimes her name is used in the same negative vane as Mr. Powell's. Why??? Lord only knows... (oh, because she's a republican and that just ain't right???
)Conservatives don't like "gansta' rap" because it glorifies actions that most people don't want their children engaging in. It has nothing to do with race (as you graciously added in "white"), as the same sentiment appeared in the 80's with many heavy metal bands (i.e. Judas Priest). Come on nighttimer, let's just slide that race card right back into the box please...
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Jun 23 2005, 02:28 PM)
Condeleeza won an NAACP award because she's a forthright and upstanding part of the American society. The funny thing, is sometimes her name is used in the same negative vane as Mr. Powell's. Why??? Lord only knows... (oh, because she's a republican and that just ain't right???
) Conservatives don't like "gansta' rap" because it glorifies actions that most people don't want their children engaging in. It has nothing to do with race (as you graciously added in "white"), as the same sentiment appeared in the 80's with many heavy metal bands (i.e. Judas Priest). Come on nighttimer, let's just slide that race card right back into the box please...
Condeleeza's a 'bama native so she does comparatively well around here.
In any case it is true that many black people don't like Republicans. That is hardly the subject here and there is pretty good reason.
As far as recent history goes blacks are the most tramautized people in this country and Republicans had far too much to do with it (alon with Southern democrats of course)
In nighttimer defense, he's not the one who pulled the race card on gansta rap. He was merely parroting a common argument of the "dysfunctional sub-culture" crowd that blacks choice of music is somehow responsible for their economic performance.
For these people it has everything to do with race.
Speaking of which I'm going to make an observation here on the dearth of evidence or even solid reasoning posted to this thread to support to contention that blacks refuse to integrate into "mainstream America."
I'm going to note that although I deplore this abscence I am not surprised by it. I will further note that I hope no other "Race debate" thread will be victim to this tired and now clearly baseless old line.
I resolve not to hold my breath...
I haven't read it, but Thomas Sowell's latest book, Black rednecks and white liberals, argues that many of the mannerisms associated with "black culture" go back to the redneck culture in parts of Britain from where future white Southerns emigrated. "Black culture" is just an extension of parts of Southern culture. I'm not sure I buy into it, but as someone who thinks of linguistics and accents as a hobby, I found this tidbit interesting.
Other parts of it I'm not so sure about, but they are food for thought.
QUOTE
Saying "acrost" for "across" or "ax" for "ask" are today considered to be part of black English. But this way of talking was common centuries ago in those regions of Britain from which white Southerners came. They brought with them more than their own dialect. They brought a whole way of life that made antebellum white Southerners very different from white Northerners.
Other parts of it I'm not so sure about, but they are food for thought.
QUOTE
Violence was far more common in the South -- and in those parts of Britain from which Southerners came. So was illegitimacy, lively music and dance, and a style of religious oratory marked by strident rhetoric, unbridled emotions, and flamboyant imagery. All of this would become part of the cultural legacy of blacks, who lived for centuries in the midst of the redneck culture of the South.
QUOTE(nighttimer @ Jun 23 2005, 07:28 AM)
I don't HAVE any black leader. There are no more Martins or Malcolms in the pipeline. That caliber of leader comes along only once in a lifetime and once they're gone that's it.
This is an interesting point nightimer.
You know I can't think of any “white” leader who represents me. The problem, may be that I’m not a good follower--or leader either, for that matter.
I live in the 12th Congressional District of Texas represented, or misrepresented if you will, by Kay Granger.
There are a number of people in Congress who represent my views better than Granger. One of them—a man I see frequently on talk shows--is one of the founders of the Black Congressional Caucus—Charles Rangel, Rep. New York. (D)
If members of Congress had contracts like athletes, I’d be willing to trade Granger, two first round draft choices and maybe a Republican to be named later for Rangel in well, a New York minute.
http://www.house.gov/rangel/bio.shtml
The real problem may be that liberals are having a hard time integrating into the current politically conservative climate. Then again, I’m really not making much of an effort.
QUOTE(BoF @ Jun 23 2005, 06:00 PM)
QUOTE(nighttimer @ Jun 23 2005, 07:28 AM)
I don't HAVE any black leader. There are no more Martins or Malcolms in the pipeline. That caliber of leader comes along only once in a lifetime and once they're gone that's it.
This is an interesting point nightimer.
You know I can't think of any “white” leader who represents me. The problem, may be that I’m not a good follower--or leader either, for that matter.
I live in the 12th Congressional District of Texas represented, or misrepresented if you will, by Kay Granger.
<snip>
The real problem may be that liberals are having a hard time integrtating into the current politically conservative climate. Then again, I’m really not making much of an effort.
Hey BoF, it cuts both ways. My (black) leaders who don't represent my views include:
- City Alderman - Madeline Haithcock - A Democratic machine appointee who got the job when her husband died.
- Congressman - Danny Davis -
- Senator Barrack Obama
I'm against these politicians because of their stand on issues. Not because they are black.
Just on this topic - Does it encourage or discourage assimilation if your Congressional district and resultant black leader come from a piece of geography that is drawn specifically to exclude white people? Just a thought on gerrymandering. I've heard plenty of minority politicians claiming that one has to "look like" his constituency.
I think the assimilation talk is overblown just like turnea does. There are millions of white kids who can't dress, talk or act right, listen to violent music and have babies out of wedlock. It's just that no one expects them to represent their whole "race."
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
To the exact degree the average African American's income and opportunity measure up to that of caucasians and asians (who seem more financially capable of equaling "White America's" spending and education trends). This isn't a race issue, it's a class issue. Always has been, always will be. The European bondservants and early immigrants were considered outsiders and a subculture, then it was slaves, then freedmen, then Jews (some of America's first organized crime rings were run by Jewish immigrants), and Irish, and Italians (mafia, remember?), and asian gangs, and black gangs in worsening inner cities, and so on. It isn't about race, it never has been. It's about what you grow up in and what you see as your chances and how others treat you.
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
Well, the mainstream still seems to believe anyone can be President, anyone can be a Trump or a Bill Gates. The mainstream, even when disgusted with wars and taxes and their culture, tend to have faith in that culture and a desire to preserve it more or less as it is, from their own neighborhood to the White House and Congress, electoral system, and policies. They don't like everything about America, but they can deal with it, and many are fiercely protective of the status quo, even when it hurts them individually.
Is integration desirable?
In this time and place? I'd say no. Discontent is good. But if people of other ethnic groups became more contented because more of their needs for opportunity and material necessities were fulfilled, that would be a good sign indeed.
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
No, not at all. There are many nonwhite conservatives. The mainstream American contentment was merely felt first by Europeans who had been here a certain amount of time and were at the top of the power structure. The Irish immigrants became mainstream rather quickly, after taking over the policing and later much of the city politics in the North. But it is harder for those who are different by appearance from those in power, and especially difficult for Native Americans and African Americans, who are feared by many, not for what they did, but for what was done to them, in the distant and not so distant past.
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
I've noticed that language is enriched by subcultures, although many 'street' words annoy me, I don't hear new words and phrases coming out of mainstream America, unless they're coming out of laboratories or from computer geeks. The educated elite don't often seem to use their minds to make poetry of speech and music of phrases. But the subcultures do and are.
But most important is the discontent, the pointing out and fighting against what is wrong in America, the refusing to go along and be content. It's dangerous to be complacent, and mainstream America is terribly complacent (can afford to be, at least for now), and the subcultures aren't. And we need that discontent, because all is not well, and the blotches are not tolerable, and the stains on our nation should be removed.
To the exact degree the average African American's income and opportunity measure up to that of caucasians and asians (who seem more financially capable of equaling "White America's" spending and education trends). This isn't a race issue, it's a class issue. Always has been, always will be. The European bondservants and early immigrants were considered outsiders and a subculture, then it was slaves, then freedmen, then Jews (some of America's first organized crime rings were run by Jewish immigrants), and Irish, and Italians (mafia, remember?), and asian gangs, and black gangs in worsening inner cities, and so on. It isn't about race, it never has been. It's about what you grow up in and what you see as your chances and how others treat you.
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
Well, the mainstream still seems to believe anyone can be President, anyone can be a Trump or a Bill Gates. The mainstream, even when disgusted with wars and taxes and their culture, tend to have faith in that culture and a desire to preserve it more or less as it is, from their own neighborhood to the White House and Congress, electoral system, and policies. They don't like everything about America, but they can deal with it, and many are fiercely protective of the status quo, even when it hurts them individually.
Is integration desirable?
In this time and place? I'd say no. Discontent is good. But if people of other ethnic groups became more contented because more of their needs for opportunity and material necessities were fulfilled, that would be a good sign indeed.
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
No, not at all. There are many nonwhite conservatives. The mainstream American contentment was merely felt first by Europeans who had been here a certain amount of time and were at the top of the power structure. The Irish immigrants became mainstream rather quickly, after taking over the policing and later much of the city politics in the North. But it is harder for those who are different by appearance from those in power, and especially difficult for Native Americans and African Americans, who are feared by many, not for what they did, but for what was done to them, in the distant and not so distant past.
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
I've noticed that language is enriched by subcultures, although many 'street' words annoy me, I don't hear new words and phrases coming out of mainstream America, unless they're coming out of laboratories or from computer geeks. The educated elite don't often seem to use their minds to make poetry of speech and music of phrases. But the subcultures do and are.
But most important is the discontent, the pointing out and fighting against what is wrong in America, the refusing to go along and be content. It's dangerous to be complacent, and mainstream America is terribly complacent (can afford to be, at least for now), and the subcultures aren't. And we need that discontent, because all is not well, and the blotches are not tolerable, and the stains on our nation should be removed.
QUOTE(turnea @ Jun 23 2005, 05:00 PM)
In nighttimer defense, he's not the one who pulled the race card on gansta rap. He was merely parroting a common argument of the "dysfunctional sub-culture" crowd that blacks choice of music is somehow responsible for their economic performance.
Actually, not to be difficult, but nighttimer did pull the race card on this one. He said "white conservatives have a problem with gansta' rap. That insinuates two things. One, of course that all conservatives are white. Secondly that conservatives are the only ones with problems with this type of music. Frankly, that's absurd. Many people of all walks of life aren't too enthusiastic about the caustic nature of gansta rap, and as said before, this also applies to any other "negatively driven" music (i.e. death metal, etc). If we were to take a poll of men and women across America in reference to music that is violently centered or portrays women in a negative light, etc... it we be very bi-partisan
Also, to address the idea that there are no "black leaders" by nighttimer, I don't necessarily agree. The thing is that there may not be leaders that you believe are like-minded, but that has nothing to do with a lack of positive influences or hard working/dedicated black leaders. It's just that you have chosen to disassociate yourself from some whom you believe don't carry the weight of the black cause. Also, I believe Dr King was/is one of the most influential men in contemporary American society, but lest we not forget that he was a rumored adulterer... and inherently flawed just as the rest of us are.
If it were me, I'd be proud of the THREE C's. Heck, I'm white and I'm proud of at least Mrs. Rice and Mr. Powell. Don't agree with their politics. Fine, but to negate the idea that these people have done well for themselves and are great role-models for your children is beyond my comprehension...
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Jun 24 2005, 05:44 PM)
Also, to address the idea that there are no "black leaders" by nighttimer, I don't necessarily agree. The thing is that there may not be leaders that you believe are like-minded, but that has nothing to do with a lack of positive influences or hard working/dedicated black leaders. It's just that you have chosen to disassociate yourself from some whom you believe don't carry the weight of the black cause. Also, I believe Dr King was/is one of the most influential men in contemporary American society, but lest we not forget that he was a rumored adulterer... and inherently flawed just as the rest of us are.
If it were me, I'd be proud of the THREE C's. Heck, I'm white and I'm proud of at least Mrs. Rice and Mr. Powell. Don't agree with their politics. Fine, but to negate the idea that these people have done well for themselves and are great role-models for your children is beyond my comprehension...
If it were me, I'd be proud of the THREE C's. Heck, I'm white and I'm proud of at least Mrs. Rice and Mr. Powell. Don't agree with their politics. Fine, but to negate the idea that these people have done well for themselves and are great role-models for your children is beyond my comprehension...
Not to speak for nighttimer, but I think part of his point is that the idea of there being some all-encompassing Black leader (in today's climate) is pretty far-fetched. Things were different in the 60s - there were common goals among pretty much ALL African Americans - the fight for civil rights. There weren't 50 million other pressing issues at the time because without basic civil rights, none of the other stuff mattered. Now, because of the different political and cultural climate of the country, there is no 'Black leader'. On the flip side, who are the White leaders?
carlitoswhey made a great point below about the idea that blacks in the spotlight are somehow expected to represent/speak for their entire race ("what's the Black point-of-view on this issue?") - that's sort of how I feel about the whole "Black leader" argument. And yes, I have respect for Colin Powell (and would even vote for him if he were ever to run for president...I've always liked him despite some of his views) and Condoleezza Rice (I even know how to spell her name
) for their accomplishments just as almost all of the Black people in my life do. If there is ever going to be a Black leader in this era, I think it will be Barack Obama (and I certainly hope I'm right). He is a fantastic orator/communicator and he has ideas that have sparked a great deal of interest in people all across the country, not just in Illinois. He has the potential to become something great and I for one am extremely excited about him! Obama in 2012/2016
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Jun 24 2005, 05:44 PM)
.
Also, to address the idea that there are no "black leaders" by nighttimer, I don't necessarily agree. The thing is that there may not be leaders that you believe are like-minded, but that has nothing to do with a lack of positive influences or hard working/dedicated black leaders. It's just that you have chosen to disassociate yourself from some whom you believe don't carry the weight of the black cause. Also, I believe Dr King was/is one of the most influential men in contemporary American society, but lest we not forget that he was a rumored adulterer... and inherently flawed just as the rest of us are.
If it were me, I'd be proud of the THREE C's. Heck, I'm white and I'm proud of at least Mrs. Rice and Mr. Powell. Don't agree with their politics. Fine, but to negate the idea that these people have done well for themselves and are great role-models for your children is beyond my comprehension...
Also, to address the idea that there are no "black leaders" by nighttimer, I don't necessarily agree. The thing is that there may not be leaders that you believe are like-minded, but that has nothing to do with a lack of positive influences or hard working/dedicated black leaders. It's just that you have chosen to disassociate yourself from some whom you believe don't carry the weight of the black cause. Also, I believe Dr King was/is one of the most influential men in contemporary American society, but lest we not forget that he was a rumored adulterer... and inherently flawed just as the rest of us are.
If it were me, I'd be proud of the THREE C's. Heck, I'm white and I'm proud of at least Mrs. Rice and Mr. Powell. Don't agree with their politics. Fine, but to negate the idea that these people have done well for themselves and are great role-models for your children is beyond my comprehension...
I never said there were no black leaders. I said:
QUOTE
Suzy Steamboat and Turnea are both considerably younger than I am, but like them I never got a ballot to cast a vote for my "black leader." I don't HAVE a black leader. There are no more Martins or Malcolms in the pipeline. That caliber of leader comes along only once in a lifetime and once they're gone that's it.
(edited to correct a word)But there is another interesting phrase that you used aevans176. It's just that you have chosen to disassociate yourself from some whom you believe don't carry the weight of the black cause.
A few months ago the National Convention of Black Mayors held their annual convention in Columbus. Over 200 mayors from cites, towns and villages came to the city to meet, mingle, brainstorm and have fun. The was a moment of controversy over the invitation of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan being invited to speak. Michael Coleman, the mayor of Columbus is black and is running for governor next year. He was criticized by the local Republican Party for permitting Farrakhan to appear at the convention.
“The mayor’s willingness to embrace such a racially divisive figure raises serious questions about his leadership priorities,” said Bob Bennett, chairman of the Ohio Republican Party. Another GOP spokesperson suggested the mayors should have invited former Congressman J.C. Watts instead of Farrakhan.
I had to laugh at that. J.C. Watts? His own daddy said a black man voting for the Republicans was like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders. But more than that, Watts has no juice in the black community. As The Last Black Republican Congressman, he may hold a unique position in history, but he doesn't make the hearts of the masses skip a beat.
Mayor Coleman said he played no part in inviting Farrakhan or any other speaker to the conference and stated he disagreed with the Nation of Islam leader on various issues but defended his right to attend and to speak. Coleman did not attend the “Think Tank: Mayors Move Into the Next Decade” session Friday where Farrakhan and Columbia political science professor Manning Marable were slated to speak.
Minister Farrakhan never mentioned Coleman by name but there was no doubt who he meant when he made this statement, “You will disrespect the people that elected you to bow down before the powers that did not but control you.” The Nation of Islam minister chided politicians who aspire to higher office but in order to appease whites, “scratch where you don’t itch.”
But it was Manning Marable whom I found the most interesting. Marable said it was time for Blacks to get over the need for symbolic representation. Or to put it more simply, it was time to stop thinking it was enough "to put a Black face in a formerly all-White place."
It is not enough to be happy that there's a Black mayor or Senator or Secretary of State or Supreme Court Justice if all they are is a black face in a formerly white place. If all that person does is maintain the status quo then they are of no use to Black people because for far too long the maintaining the status quo represented racism and White supremacy.
There is nothing to apologize for by being an advocate for one own's people. The problem is when you champion their rights to the detriment of others in all cases.
Black leadership has been primarily successful in walking the fine line that enables them to represent their core constituents while not threatening those of Whites.
Finally, I don't share your admiration for Clarence Thomas as I feel he has turned his back on Black people and is the personification of a self-hating Black man. That said, I think he is a somewhat tragic, if not pathetic figure who has a serious problem with living in his own skin. He and Michael Jackson would probably have a lot in common in their loathing for their own skin color.
It's fine with me if Whites admire Thomas, Watts, Walter Williams, Larry Elder, Thomas Sowell and any other African-American they so choose. Usually I find they do so because they find these Blacks share most of their opinions of various issues. That's fine. Most of us prefer the company of those whom we have things in common than those we do not.
But I don't want White people to tell me whom I should admire, whom I should make a role model, and whom I should consider a "leader." One reason is that when Whites have chosen a Black person to be a "representative of the race" there has been ulterior motives at work.
You mentioned Dr. King, aevans176? Some folks had someone else in mind to supplant him as a prominent "black leader."
Martin Luther King, Jr. was the target of an elaborate FBI plot to drive him to
suicide and replace him "in his role of the leadership of the Negro people" with conservative Black lawyer Samuel Pierce (later named to Reagan's cabinet).
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/P...DomCovOps1.html
The FBI once hatched a scheme to "completely discredit" King and have him replaced by a civil rights leader the Bureau could control. The one individual named by the Bureau as "the right kind of Negro leader" was lawyer Samuel Pierce-who years later became the only black in President Reagan's cabinet.
King was hated and regularly threatened by white supremacists and extremists-but the FBI developed a written policy of not informing King about threats to his life. Why? Because of his "unsavory character," "arrogance and "uncooperative attitude."
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/FBIAbuse_WMOZ.html
"It should be clear to all of us that King must, at some propitious point in the future, be revealed to the people of this country and to his Negro followers as being what he actually is - a fraud, demagogue and scoundrel. When the true facts concerning his activities are presented, such should be enough, if handled properly, to take him off his pedestal and to reduce him completely in influence."
Sullivan's suggested replacement for King was Samuel Pierce, a conservative lawyer who was later to serve as Secretary of Housing under President Ronald Reagan.
William Sullivan was the assistant director of the FBI's Intelligence Division and the third highest ranking official in the FBI.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKsullivan.htm
So you'll have to understand my skepticism when White people try to tell Black people who they should choose as their leaders. The reasons behind the suggestion are not always noble ones.
QUOTE(nighttimer @ Jun 24 2005, 06:54 PM)
You mentioned Dr. King, aevans176? Some folks had someone else in mind to supplant him as a prominent "black leader."
Martin Luther King, Jr. was the target of an elaborate FBI plot to drive him to
suicide and replace him "in his role of the leadership of the Negro people" with conservative Black lawyer Samuel Pierce (later named to Reagan's cabinet).
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/P...DomCovOps1.html
The FBI once hatched a scheme to "completely discredit" King and have him replaced by a civil rights leader the Bureau could control. The one individual named by the Bureau as "the right kind of Negro leader" was lawyer Samuel Pierce-who years later became the only black in President Reagan's cabinet.
King was hated and regularly threatened by white supremacists and extremists-but the FBI developed a written policy of not informing King about threats to his life. Why? Because of his "unsavory character," "arrogance and "uncooperative attitude."
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/FBIAbuse_WMOZ.html
"It should be clear to all of us that King must, at some propitious point in the future, be revealed to the people of this country and to his Negro followers as being what he actually is - a fraud, demagogue and scoundrel. When the true facts concerning his activities are presented, such should be enough, if handled properly, to take him off his pedestal and to reduce him completely in influence."
Sullivan's suggested replacement for King was Samuel Pierce, a conservative lawyer who was later to serve as Secretary of Housing under President Ronald Reagan.
William Sullivan was the assistant director of the FBI's Intelligence Division and the third highest ranking official in the FBI.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKsullivan.htm
So you'll have to understand my skepticism when White people try to tell Black people who they should choose as their leaders. The reasons behind the suggestion are not always noble ones.
Martin Luther King, Jr. was the target of an elaborate FBI plot to drive him to
suicide and replace him "in his role of the leadership of the Negro people" with conservative Black lawyer Samuel Pierce (later named to Reagan's cabinet).
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/P...DomCovOps1.html
The FBI once hatched a scheme to "completely discredit" King and have him replaced by a civil rights leader the Bureau could control. The one individual named by the Bureau as "the right kind of Negro leader" was lawyer Samuel Pierce-who years later became the only black in President Reagan's cabinet.
King was hated and regularly threatened by white supremacists and extremists-but the FBI developed a written policy of not informing King about threats to his life. Why? Because of his "unsavory character," "arrogance and "uncooperative attitude."
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/FBIAbuse_WMOZ.html
"It should be clear to all of us that King must, at some propitious point in the future, be revealed to the people of this country and to his Negro followers as being what he actually is - a fraud, demagogue and scoundrel. When the true facts concerning his activities are presented, such should be enough, if handled properly, to take him off his pedestal and to reduce him completely in influence."
Sullivan's suggested replacement for King was Samuel Pierce, a conservative lawyer who was later to serve as Secretary of Housing under President Ronald Reagan.
William Sullivan was the assistant director of the FBI's Intelligence Division and the third highest ranking official in the FBI.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKsullivan.htm
So you'll have to understand my skepticism when White people try to tell Black people who they should choose as their leaders. The reasons behind the suggestion are not always noble ones.
While I have neither the time nor the energy to argue the beginning of your post, I will address this subversive and irrational portion, being that your sources are purely rhetorical rants by like minded people.
nighttimer, the links you provide are neither governmental records nor written by the people that you are accusing. These sites are information no more important or pertinent than my opinion. Where does their information come from? The first of your posts is nearly a BLOG, as opposed to an academically written piece of informative work. whatreallyhappened.com is just a site that is centered around conspiracy theories and ideas... come on...
I could use sites like : humaneventsonline.com, the nationalreview.com and get as much objective information, or heck... probably more! Seriously.
Secondly, addressing your lack of black leaders that share your ideals, I believe that not all black people feel the way you do. I know this for a fact. If I were to use your logic, or a lack there of, I could say that there aren't any white southern males whom came from modest beginnings in politics today. Who are my leaders?
But realistically, I know that there are plenty of contemporary leaders of all races, of whom don't necessarily have to appear in CNBC to be a successful leader.
I don't necessarily get your mention of Farrakhan. Are you saying that he should have been allowed to speak, or not? I surely hope not. Allowing Farrakhan to speak at a conference representing black mayors is like David Duke speaking at a similiar conference for white Mayors. Farrakhan is an outwardly anti-semetic racist.
You mention Thomas, Watts, Walter Williams, Larry Elder, and Thomas Sowell, where as I never did. I do believe that your disdain for Colin Powell or C Rice has been beaten like a dead horse. So, I'll turn the table. I admire Gen Powell. He is an accomplished soldier, a patriot, and intelligent author. He came from more than meager beginnings and has served his country well. I would be proud to wear those titles.
What about someone like Tim Duncan? He's black (as black as Obama Barack... well actually more!) He takes care of his family, is one of the best basketball players of our generation, exudes enormous character, and is outwardly Christian. What an awful leader....
It's not what you say, but surely more what you do. To address kmsouthern, the white leaders are people like: (heck, these should be leaders for anyone regardless of skin tone)
Pat Tillman, a man whose career was the dream of every young boy in America, but gave his life in defense of our nation.
Prentice Meador- a celebrated preacher, mentor, and the pastor of my church. Read anything you can find on google. A wonderful man with passion for compassion. He has a doctorate (from the University of Illinois). He has been a college professor (at UCLA), a communications consultant (the first asked to serve in bringing blacks and whites together after the Watts riots), widely travelled (he has spoken in more than 20 countries while on 12 mission or educational journeys), an editor (he has been managing editor of 21st Century Christian magazine for more than a decade), an author (he has written on several fields of religion), recipient of numerous honors (including the Linz Award 1995 for the Dallas County citizen whose civic or humanitarian efforts most benefited the community) and a member of numerous boards of organizations (including the Abilene Christian Board of Trustees and the Associates Board of Pepperdine).
Paul R Smith. the first medal of honor recipient in Iraq. In total disregard for his own life, he maintained his exposed position in order to engage the attacking enemy force. During this action, he was mortally wounded. His courageous actions helped defeat the enemy attack, and resulted in as many as 50 enemy soldiers killed, while allowing the safe withdrawal of numerous wounded soldiers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
There may not be "leaders" on Capitol Hill.... but America has plenty... plenty...
It is at this point I get to ask the question:
Wait, what were we talking about?
Please remember this is a debate on whether blacks are integrated into "mainstream America."
Whether or not the majority of blacks admire conservative African-Americans is wholly irrelevant as I see it.
There is still no case for the "dysfunctional sub-culture' rhetoric.
Edited to remove silly typing errors.
Wait, what were we talking about?
Please remember this is a debate on whether blacks are integrated into "mainstream America."
Whether or not the majority of blacks admire conservative African-Americans is wholly irrelevant as I see it.
There is still no case for the "dysfunctional sub-culture' rhetoric.
Edited to remove silly typing errors.
Assimilation is racism. Any person with even the barest knowledge on the subject will say this. To say that black people should give up their culture is an uttery, despicably racist sentiment. Also, it is racism to give African-Americans no stake in our society, and to give African-American culture no place in our society. It is a painful reflection that only assimilated African-Americans succeed in our culture. Why is it that only those who adapt themselves to the main culture of our nation can truly succeed in it, and those who hold themselves to a subculture can only succeed within that subculture? Phrased that way, the question is nonsensical. However, because our primary culture was founded by white men, it is considered the culture of white men. As long as such a concept is present, racism is inherent, only answerable by secession or utter revolution. Otherwise, those who devote themselves fully to their own subculture will be within that subculture.
The Republicans wish African-Americans to be assimilated, placing America before heritage. However, any good liberal will say that this is racist; it is utterly racist to believe that African-Americans should not live in a state of cultural segregation, independent of whites. This wholly separate culture must also be held to be equal to white culture. The intellectuals know that only with the two races mindful of their differences can an end to racism be realized.
The Republicans wish African-Americans to be assimilated, placing America before heritage. However, any good liberal will say that this is racist; it is utterly racist to believe that African-Americans should not live in a state of cultural segregation, independent of whites. This wholly separate culture must also be held to be equal to white culture. The intellectuals know that only with the two races mindful of their differences can an end to racism be realized.
QUOTE(turnea @ Jun 21 2005, 12:48 PM)
Better to simply ask the question and see if we have the fortitude to answer.
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
I guess you have define what you mean by "blacks" first and also explain how that definition is reconciled with the reality that people of "mixed" racial backgrounds, to one extent or another, are becoming more and more common.
I don't have statistics on "assimilation". My guess is that a growing number of people you'd call "blacks" have assimilated successfully but that a significant number have stubbornly resisted doing so and have created their own parallel culture with associated customs, traditions, language, and dress and associate and have a "membership" that is totally and completely dependent on "racial" characteristics.
QUOTE(turnea @ Jun 21 2005, 12:48 PM)
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
When being an "American" is more important than being an "African American", an "Asian American", a "Arab American", etc.
QUOTE(turnea @ Jun 21 2005, 12:48 PM)
Is integration desirable?
That depends. We are, after all, a "free" society. If people want to run off and create a commune that has its own set of beliefs, and if they don't violate the laws of our country in doing so, I say there is no harm in it. If they want to wear black Nike tennis shoes and believe that the mother-ship is behind a comet, they cause nobody harm... unless they want to kill themselves in mass. But, I'm not opposed to them per say. The same is true for a guy like Koresh who if he wanted to create a compound, and if he didn't violate laws (like he did), we should have just left him and his followers alone.
The same is true for those who want to voluntarily segregate themselves on the basis of "race". I think it's bogus, but if they only want to associate with people who "look" like themselves, and if they aren't violating any laws, I'd say it's their business. That's true for the followers of people like Farakhan and also for the low-lifes who play dress-up-nazi in northern Idaho and elsewhere. It's the fact that they gun people down, rob banks, and violate the law that is the issue; not who they choose to associate with.
But, this issue gets sticky when a group of people insist on creating their own subculture, with their own norms, etc., and yet insist that they receive all the benefits of "mainstream society" membership. One can't have it both ways. It gets even tricker when the subculture allows behaviors that are clearly self destructive; and that impact the "mainstream culture" in negative ways; both from a cost and human perspective. And this is true for all "subcultures" in the US, not just those who consider themselves part of a "black culture".
QUOTE(turnea @ Jun 21 2005, 12:48 PM)
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
Of course not. We're a multi-racial society. In fact, I'd say the USA is the "most successful" multi-racial society on the face of the earth and perhaps the HISTORY of the earth. It remains the dominant issue to some, unfortunately. And, it's limiting our progress as a society and as a nation.
QUOTE(turnea @ Jun 21 2005, 12:48 PM)
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
I don't agree with the premise of your question which, again, focuses on the "race" or "ethnic" characteristics of individuals. What role to individuals have in defining our culture? I'd hope that our culture is enhanced by the positive aspects of ANY subculture that has assimilated here and that we reject the negative aspects. In such a way, the mainstream culture improves, it becomes stronger, and it "grows".
Where we get off the tracks is when we group "race" and "culture" together in an illogical fashion. When we do that, all behaviors, both positive and negative get lumped in together and can't be differentiated without the risk of being branded a "racist".
If we focus on the "content of a person's character", not the "color of their skin", we'll all be better off. One can't eliminate racism, after all, if one practices it.
QUOTE(Bay State Rebel @ Jun 28 2005, 08:30 PM)
Assimilation is racism. Any person with even the barest knowledge on the subject will say this. To say that black people should give up their culture is an uttery, despicably racist sentiment.
Exactly which culture is this and where is it found on the face of the planet Earth? There is no such thing as 'black culture' because black is a skin color, not a location or a belief system. To lump people who come from a wide range of places under the common name of 'black culture' is ludicrous. How is the culture in South Africa the same as the culture in Kenya or Jamaica? It's just an attempt to force people who share the same amount of melanin in the skin together into a coehsive block. That's about as ridiculous as trying to say that Russians and Jews and Australians all share the same culture because they're all white.
The reality is that most blacks have never been to Africa. Neither have their parents. Neither have their grandparents. To claim a link to 'black culture' in Africa is ludicrous at best. And which 'black culture' are they talking about? There's hundreds if not thousands of them. American 'black culture' is a wholly invented thing. You're not going to find anyone in Africa celebrating Kwanzaa, it was invented in the US in the 60s. You're not going to find much in common between US 'black culture' and any African 'black culture'.
So how is it racist? If there's any culture to be had in the United States, it's going to be a United States culture, and that's not drawn along racial, religious or ethnic lines. We're all Americans, let's try acting like it.
QUOTE(Cephus @ Jun 29 2005, 01:03 PM)
The reality is that most blacks have never been to Africa. Neither have their parents. Neither have their grandparents. To claim a link to 'black culture' in Africa is ludicrous at best. And which 'black culture' are they talking about? There's hundreds if not thousands of them. American 'black culture' is a wholly invented thing. You're not going to find anyone in Africa celebrating Kwanzaa, it was invented in the US in the 60s. You're not going to find much in common between US 'black culture' and any African 'black culture'.
So how is it racist? If there's any culture to be had in the United States, it's going to be a United States culture, and that's not drawn along racial, religious or ethnic lines. We're all Americans, let's try acting like it.
So how is it racist? If there's any culture to be had in the United States, it's going to be a United States culture, and that's not drawn along racial, religious or ethnic lines. We're all Americans, let's try acting like it.
TWO THUMBS UP TO YOU CEPHUS!!!!! You hit the nail on the head...
Bay State Rebel, something you'll soon find upon arrival in Africa, is that most Africans don't act or live like American black people, and rarely look like them either. They dress differently, speak differently, and often times even have different physical characteristics. The ironic thing is that many Black Africans don't want to be associated with black people in America. I have been to South Africa and to Egypt. Both have people with "black" skin, but they are easily told apart....
Even funnier to me is that people often times believe that Black Africans are all the same. We negate the fact that people in Southern Africa look and live very differently from people in N Africa. This analogy applies to Eastern and Western Africa as well. Come on...
It is utterly racist, to coin your phrase, to expect a whole segment of society to be divided solely based upon their skin color.
If this is the case, then we'd have to assume that people that are 1/2 black fall completely into their own categories, as they are a part of neither culture. Do they associate simply with themselves??? wow...
We'd have to assume that hispanics and asians cannot assimilate and participate in "our" culture so to speak. Furthermore, we use culture as a strange term that has little meaning. Are we talking about music, food, and dress??? If so, people in Texas often would have a very different culture than people in Vermont.
So, that leads us to the question... what does "being American" mean???
There aresubcultures that exist within the American culture. These subcultures can cross racial lines. These subcultures can be positive or negative when it comes to preparing an individual to succeed in the dominant culture. Thomas Sowell has an interesting take on a certain subculture.
From:
Black rednecks and white liberals
Thomas Sowell
May 5, 2005
Same article:
No one defends white trailer park trash culture, no one defends white people who can't speak English properly. We make jokes about rednecks and
One fact the black illegitimacy rate hovers around 70%, in my mind that is a cancer in the black community and does show there is a significant population of Americans who exist in a subculture that throws obstacles in the path to success.
From:
Black rednecks and white liberals
Thomas Sowell
May 5, 2005
QUOTE
Many aspects of Southern life that some observers have attributed to race or racism, or to slavery, were common to Southern blacks and whites alike -- and were common in those parts of Britain from which Southern whites came, where there were no slaves and where most people had never seen anyone black.
Most Southern blacks and whites moved away from that redneck culture over the generations, as its consequences proved to be counterproductive or even disastrous. But it survives today among the poorest and least educated ghetto blacks.
Most Southern blacks and whites moved away from that redneck culture over the generations, as its consequences proved to be counterproductive or even disastrous. But it survives today among the poorest and least educated ghetto blacks.
Same article:
QUOTE
White liberals come into this story because, since the 1960s, they have been aiding and abetting a counterproductive ghetto lifestyle that is essentially a remnant of the redneck culture which handicapped Southern whites and blacks alike for generations.
No one defends white trailer park trash culture, no one defends white people who can't speak English properly. We make jokes about rednecks and
Edited to remove profanity, filter didn't catch
. We don't condemn whites to low expectations, why should we condemn blacks by allowing black children to celebrate their ignorance?One fact the black illegitimacy rate hovers around 70%, in my mind that is a cancer in the black community and does show there is a significant population of Americans who exist in a subculture that throws obstacles in the path to success.
"Black culture" doesn't necessarily refer to African culture, but the fusion of African culture, American culture, and slave culture. It is currently, in several forms, a major subculture. Many consider discriminating against said culture as bad as discriminating against African-Americans in general. For most of that post, I was speaking elliptically, attempting to illustrate the flaws in that idea. I thought that I made this clear; it seems I should have made it clearer.
QUOTE(Cephus @ Jun 29 2005, 01:03 PM)
QUOTE(Bay State Rebel @ Jun 28 2005, 08:30 PM)
Assimilation is racism. Any person with even the barest knowledge on the subject will say this. To say that black people should give up their culture is an uttery, despicably racist sentiment.
Exactly which culture is this and where is it found on the face of the planet Earth? There is no such thing as 'black culture' because black is a skin color, not a location or a belief system. To lump people who come from a wide range of places under the common name of 'black culture' is ludicrous. How is the culture in South Africa the same as the culture in Kenya or Jamaica? It's just an attempt to force people who share the same amount of melanin in the skin together into a coehsive block. That's about as ridiculous as trying to say that Russians and Jews and Australians all share the same culture because they're all white.
The reality is that most blacks have never been to Africa. Neither have their parents. Neither have their grandparents. To claim a link to 'black culture' in Africa is ludicrous at best. And which 'black culture' are they talking about? There's hundreds if not thousands of them. American 'black culture' is a wholly invented thing. You're not going to find anyone in Africa celebrating Kwanzaa, it was invented in the US in the 60s. You're not going to find much in common between US 'black culture' and any African 'black culture'.
So how is it racist? If there's any culture to be had in the United States, it's going to be a United States culture, and that's not drawn along racial, religious or ethnic lines. We're all Americans, let's try acting like it.
Cephus, I assume you are en expert then on the roots of the cultural traditions many American blacks engage in today? Like the tradition of cornrows (often considered "unprofessional" for the workplace for purely racist reasons), a "wholly invented thing" ? Or African-American Vernacular English, which - like all language and tends to evolve over time out of pre-existing words- this is also something black people pulled out of their collective behinds?
I don't know why you bring up Kenya and Jamaica. Even if some of the aspects of black culture practiced today can't be traced back to Africa, that doesn't make them any less valid of a cultural aspect. Culture evolves. It is generally accepted, Cephus, that "black culture" refers to African-American culture. This is not to say that there aren't major differences between African-Americans, but there are cultural habits that most of us tend to share more often than not. A generalization? Perhaps. Racist? Ye gods, no.
There are dozens of subcultures in America, many of them racially based. Are you saying that the behaviors of families living in Little Italy or Chinatown are "wholly invented" as well, then?
QUOTE
The Republicans wish African-Americans to be assimilated, placing America before heritage. However, any good liberal will say that this is racist; it is utterly racist to believe that African-Americans should not live in a state of cultural segregation, independent of whites. This wholly separate culture must also be held to be equal to white culture. The intellectuals know that only with the two races mindful of their differences can an end to racism be realized.
Bay State Rebel makes many good points, but I disagree with one thing: mainly, the opinion that black culture is "wholly separate" from white culture. I'd say phenomenons such as Enimen and the Beastie Boys are but two indicators that black culture, for the most part, is American culture. Which would be the first thing wrong with those of the "they need to assimilate" mindset. I have severe issues with the idea that we need to assimilate*, mainly because that's code for "act white." Whenever someone says "American culture" in this context, 9 times out of 10 they are referring to white culture - as if whites are the only people who live in America, or have some sort of monopoly on what should be the cultural standard. Honestly, what does that mean? Should we all dye our hair blond and get toupees? Watch Friends and listen to Faith Hill?
This thinking is dangerous, if not outright denigrating. Cultural standards on acceptable behavior, language, and dress shouldn't be up to the preferences of one race. And yet, that is the reality that blacks have to live with now. For example, I know right now that my haircut is generally inappropriate for professional atmospheres, and so if I wanted a job at a place like that, I would be prepared to get a more professional hairstyle. But honestly, what does that mean? I know of many black women who work at places where it's thought that cornrows are unprofessional, and that's nothing but racist. Braids are not unprofessional, nor are dreadlocks. It's all a matter of how you do them and how well you maintain them. But for many, the idea of a "professional" hairstyle for women involves sleek, straight hair. What if I was someone who'd never gotten a perm? Is natural hair "unprofessional?" Should I be expected to shell out forty dollars a month to get my hair chemically treated and my scalp burned, plus another sixty dollars a month in upkeep appointments just so my hair is the same texture my white counterparts naturally have? Are daishikis and muumuus any less professional than yarmulkes and headscarves? What makes the peculiar cultural habits of Italians, Greeks, Chinese, Japanese, French, Italian - any more acceptable than the cultural habits of blacks?
*every time I read this topic, I play "Assimilate" by Skinny Puppy. It makes for good times.
QUOTE(SuzySteamboat @ Jun 29 2005, 03:30 PM)
I'd say phenomenons such as Enimen and the Beastie Boys are but two indicators that black culture, for the most part, is American culture. Which would be the first thing wrong with those of the "they need to assimilate" mindset. I have severe issues with the idea that we need to assimilate*, mainly because that's code for "act white." Whenever someone says "American culture" in this context, 9 times out of 10 they are referring to white culture - as if whites are the only people who live in America, or have some sort of monopoly on what should be the cultural standard. Honestly, what does that mean? Should we all dye our hair blond and get toupees? Watch Friends and listen to Faith Hill?
This thinking is dangerous, if not outright denigrating. Cultural standards on acceptable behavior, language, and dress shouldn't be up to the preferences of one race. And yet, that is the reality that blacks have to live with now. For example, I know right now that my haircut is generally inappropriate for professional atmospheres, and so if I wanted a job at a place like that, I would be prepared to get a more professional hairstyle. But honestly, what does that mean? I know of many black women who work at places where it's thought that cornrows are unprofessional, and that's nothing but racist. Braids are not unprofessional, nor are dreadlocks. It's all a matter of how you do them and how well you maintain them. But for many, the idea of a "professional" hairstyle for women involves sleek, straight hair. What if I was someone who'd never gotten a perm? Is natural hair "unprofessional?" Should I be expected to shell out forty dollars a month to get my hair chemically treated and my scalp burned, plus another sixty dollars a month in upkeep appointments just so my hair is the same texture my white counterparts naturally have? Are daishikis and muumuus any less professional than yarmulkes and headscarves? What makes the peculiar cultural habits of Italians, Greeks, Chinese, Japanese, French, Italian - any more acceptable than the cultural habits of blacks?
*every time I read this topic, I play "Assimilate" by Skinny Puppy. It makes for good times.
This thinking is dangerous, if not outright denigrating. Cultural standards on acceptable behavior, language, and dress shouldn't be up to the preferences of one race. And yet, that is the reality that blacks have to live with now. For example, I know right now that my haircut is generally inappropriate for professional atmospheres, and so if I wanted a job at a place like that, I would be prepared to get a more professional hairstyle. But honestly, what does that mean? I know of many black women who work at places where it's thought that cornrows are unprofessional, and that's nothing but racist. Braids are not unprofessional, nor are dreadlocks. It's all a matter of how you do them and how well you maintain them. But for many, the idea of a "professional" hairstyle for women involves sleek, straight hair. What if I was someone who'd never gotten a perm? Is natural hair "unprofessional?" Should I be expected to shell out forty dollars a month to get my hair chemically treated and my scalp burned, plus another sixty dollars a month in upkeep appointments just so my hair is the same texture my white counterparts naturally have? Are daishikis and muumuus any less professional than yarmulkes and headscarves? What makes the peculiar cultural habits of Italians, Greeks, Chinese, Japanese, French, Italian - any more acceptable than the cultural habits of blacks?
*every time I read this topic, I play "Assimilate" by Skinny Puppy. It makes for good times.
1. Black culture and African culture are no more related than southern American culture and Russian culture. The generations of removal from Africa have proven time and time again that "black" culture has evolved into what it is today. What it isn't is African. So, why that awful term african-american???? The point is that there is an absurd notion in politically correct American society that the term "African-American" is acceptable. It's an insult to every civil rights leader, every soldier, and any proponent of equality or freedom that has come before them. I applaud anyone that wants to take a trip to Africa to see exactly how "alike" they are or aren't....
2. Determining what is "professionally appropriate" is completely dictated by the environment you're in. Frankly, Mo-hawks, purple dyed hair, or any other hair style related to white "alternative" culture is generally unacceptable. Why should "corn rows"??? Why is it racist? ? If I can't have a mohawk, why the heck can anyone else have a "less-than-acceptable" hair cut just because now it's a cultural icon???
... Where else in the world do people have corn-rows whom are in positions of power or business leadership? 3. If Dashikis are acceptable, how about overalls?? I grew up wearing overalls (being from the deep south) and believe that they should be considered professional. I could press the pants in a crease and ensure their cleanliness daily. Professional dress is something that has evolved over time to what it is today. However, even that varies dependant upon geography and working conditions. For instance, short-sleeves are acceptable here in Dallas, but not at our corporate HQ off Wall St. Your logic, or lack there of is completely based upon the idea that limiting something that black people may or may not due, is completely based upon their skin color. That's ludicrous. Headscarves?? Really. How is that related to someone's race (unless of course you're eluding to a religious scarf).
I don't believe in "assimilation", as that implies that a whole demographic of America is somehow inherently unable to be a part of our culture.... whatever that may entail.
In America, we're divided politically, geographically, economically, and socially far more than we're divided racially.
Think about it.... how many times do you go to your local bar and see a southern white christian republican hanging out with a northern black liberal??? Let's be more realistic. For the most part, liberals are associates of like-minded people, as are republicans. Christians associate with other Christians. Rich people, poor people, Southerners, Northerners, Old People, Young Peopl Conservatives, Liberals, etc all generally fall into the "birds of a feather" category. Funny how none of those labels address skin color...
As I've said till I'm blue in the face. I feel like I have more in common with a youg black christian man from the south than I do with a New England Liberal Athiest. I can tell you for sure who I'd be more comfortable with... and he wouldn't be white...
Finally, it's not about assimilation, it's about acknowledging the fact that there are divisions or differences in American culture that often times have nothing to do with the color of someone's skin. Acknowledging the idea that morals, values, and lifestyles have far more to do with the way people socialize.
To what degree are blacks "integrated into mainstream America"?
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
Is integration desirable?
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
Blacks, Hispanics, poor white trailer trash, whatever; any ethnic background can integrate as much as they choose, but some might have to give up self-defeating aspects of "culture" to do so. I am not sure how rap music, low riders, etc. became part of anyone's culture. My own younger brother would fit into the category of dumb red neck, no education to speak of, has his shack to live in, a truck, a boat, fishing poles, deer rifle, and hound dogs. No job, no wife, just him and his dogs. He isn't racist, tho. Many of his neighbors are black.
If I was asked to define white American culture, I could not. We whites are from a diverse backgound, and over time whatever culture we had has blended and averaged out until it has become invisible. So much for mainstream America.
I came from poor white, and certainly have not been able to integrate into rich white, and am not sure I want to. I have settled for middle class, works for me.
I think integrating into mainstream America means pursuing the so called American dream of home ownership, education for our children, secure future for our retirement years, etc. We can do that without losing our identity. But I have yet to see more than a few political leaders of any color or party present any kind of plans that attempt to guarantee any of that for any of us.
Maybe we are supposed to find a way to make these things happen on our own?
Within existing programs?
What does it mean to be "integrated into mainstream America"?
Is integration desirable?
Is the definition of "mainstream America' the sole purview of Americans of European descent?
What role do ethnic/racial minorities have to play in defining "mainstream America'?
Blacks, Hispanics, poor white trailer trash, whatever; any ethnic background can integrate as much as they choose, but some might have to give up self-defeating aspects of "culture" to do so. I am not sure how rap music, low riders, etc. became part of anyone's culture. My own younger brother would fit into the category of dumb red neck, no education to speak of, has his shack to live in, a truck, a boat, fishing poles, deer rifle, and hound dogs. No job, no wife, just him and his dogs. He isn't racist, tho. Many of his neighbors are black.
If I was asked to define white American culture, I could not. We whites are from a diverse backgound, and over time whatever culture we had has blended and averaged out until it has become invisible. So much for mainstream America.
I came from poor white, and certainly have not been able to integrate into rich white, and am not sure I want to. I have settled for middle class, works for me.
I think integrating into mainstream America means pursuing the so called American dream of home ownership, education for our children, secure future for our retirement years, etc. We can do that without losing our identity. But I have yet to see more than a few political leaders of any color or party present any kind of plans that attempt to guarantee any of that for any of us.
Maybe we are supposed to find a way to make these things happen on our own?
Within existing programs?
QUOTE
While I have neither the time nor the energy to argue the beginning of your post, I will address this subversive and irrational portion, being that your sources are purely rhetorical rants by like minded people.
nighttimer, the links you provide are neither governmental records nor written by the people that you are accusing. These sites are information no more important or pertinent than my opinion. Where does their information come from? The first of your posts is nearly a BLOG, as opposed to an academically written piece of informative work. whatreallyhappened.com is just a site that is centered around conspiracy theories and ideas... come on...
I could use sites like : humaneventsonline.com, the nationalreview.com and get as much objective information, or heck... probably more! Seriously.
nighttimer, the links you provide are neither governmental records nor written by the people that you are accusing. These sites are information no more important or pertinent than my opinion. Where does their information come from? The first of your posts is nearly a BLOG, as opposed to an academically written piece of informative work. whatreallyhappened.com is just a site that is centered around conspiracy theories and ideas... come on...
I could use sites like : humaneventsonline.com, the nationalreview.com and get as much objective information, or heck... probably more! Seriously.
aevans176, I have neither the time, nor the energy and especially not the interest in dredging up sources that meet your standards of credibility. This is a tactic you employed in another (now closed) thread and I am not here to convince you of anything. What cannot be denied is the fact that the FBI tried to discredit and destroy Dr. King as a leader. What cannot be denied is the fact that the COINTELPRO program existed and was a scheme to discredit and destroy organizations such as the Black Panthers and the SCLC.
The document that launched the COINTELPRO operations against Black groups directed FBI agents to "track, expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize the activities" of these dissident movements and their leaders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cointelpro
Doubt the sources if you choose. That's a lot easier than doubting the facts.
QUOTE
Secondly, addressing your lack of black leaders that share your ideals, I believe that not all black people feel the way you do. I know this for a fact.
Sigh.
I love it when White people say things like this. I never said "