Race

I have observations about the break down in black culture in the U.S. but first a comment about whites.

1. Not from personal experience but because I have three sons who are blond and very light eyed... I have to stick up for their manliness. I can tell you right now people of all races have what must be a genetic reaction to light blond hair and blue eyes or light green eyes. I have no doubt women find those traits manly. In fact it starts early. My 8 year old son is already being chased by girls in 2nd and third grade. It is borderline out of control and pisses off some of his 2nd grade friends.

2. Blacks in america have been dealt some tough cards. Our middle class's wealth was created by the post WWII housing boom which blacks were redlined out of.

3. Also, employment protection laws make it very expensive for small business owners to hire blacks. Especially in California where wealth and business ideas are incubated.

4. Quotas and other protections like affirmative action makes middle class resentful of blacks. Rich white people on the whole do not care about the color of persons skin - they just want to see that the person fits in. A well spoken educated black guy dressed in a button down and brooks brothers suit who speaks well and wears eye glasses has many open doors. But in my opinion employment protection laws increase prejudice in ares where blacks feel it the most.

5. David Stockman an economist who worked for Nixon wrote a book in the early eighties showing and predicting that welfare would marginalize black men, making them unnecessary as providers and cause a break down of black families and culture.
His prediction have proven out.

6. Prior to the civil rights movement there was a black entrepreneurial class that thrived. Many cities had areas where black business were patronized by blacks. When blacks got equal rights they exercised those rights by shopping in formerly white businesses... Messing up black business for 40 years.


The list goes on.

No doubt a great deal of blame should now be placed on black leadership. They maintain their power blocks by keep blacks thinking the wrong way. I think blaming slavery is stupid. Blacks should be blaming liberal whites politicians for being stupid and black leaders for being stupid and corrupt.

In short red lining and liberal paternalistic views towards blacks have helped contribute to the break down in black culture and black self reliance. I believe all people are responsible for their choices as individuals, I blame liberal programs for our problems as a society.
 
Quote from jem:

I have observations about the break down in black culture in the U.S. but first a comment about whites.

1. Not from personal experience but because I have three sons who are blond and very light eyed... I have to stick up for their manliness. I can tell you right now people of all races have what must be a genetic reaction to light blond hair and blue eyes or light green eyes. I have no doubt women find those traits manly. In fact it starts early. My 8 year old son is already being chased by girls in 2nd and third grade. It is borderline out of control and pisses off some of his 2nd grade friends.

2. Blacks in america have been dealt some tough cards. Our middle class's wealth was created by the post WWII housing boom which blacks were redlined out of.

3. Also, employment protection laws make it very expensive for small business owners to hire blacks. Especially in California where wealth and business ideas are incubated.

4. Quotas and other protections like affirmative action makes middle class resentful of blacks. Rich white people on the whole do not care about the color of persons skin - they just want to see that the person fits in. A well spoken educated black guy dressed in a button down and brooks brothers suit who speaks well and wears eye glasses has many open doors. But in my opinion employment protection laws increase prejudice in ares where blacks feel it the most.

5. David Stockman an economist who worked for Nixon wrote a book in the early eighties showing and predicting that welfare would marginalize black men, making them unnecessary as providers and cause a break down of black families and culture.
His prediction have proven out.

6. Prior to the civil rights movement there was a black entrepreneurial class that thrived. Many cities had areas where black business were patronized by blacks. When blacks got equal rights they exercised those rights by shopping in formerly white businesses... Messing up black business for 40 years.


The list goes on.

No doubt a great deal of blame should now be placed on black leadership. They maintain their power blocks by keep blacks thinking the wrong way. I think blaming slavery is stupid. Blacks should be blaming liberal whites politicians for being stupid and black leaders for being stupid and corrupt.

In short red lining and liberal paternalistic views towards blacks have helped contribute to the break down in black culture and black self reliance. I believe all people are responsible for their choices as individuals, I blame liberal programs for our problems as a society.

Agreed.

And, do you know who tried to point this out first?

One the most vilified of all blacks...



















Malcolm X.
 
Quote from Mom0/pH0x:

Like intelligence, personality traits are measurable, heritable within a group, and slightly different, on average, between groups. Someday someone could test whether there was selection for personality traits that are conducive to success in money-lending and mercantilism, traits that I will leave to the reader's imagination. One can also imagine how a finding of this kind would be interpreted in, say, Cairo, Tehran, and Kuala Lumpur. And the CH&H study could lower people's resistance to more invidious comparisons, such as groups who historically score lower, rather than higher, on IQ tests.

What can be done? In recent decades, the standard response to claims of genetic differences has been to deny the existence of intelligence, to deny the existence of races and other genetic groupings, and to subject proponents to vilification, censorship, and at times physical intimidation. Aside from its effects on liberal discourse, the response is problematic. Reality is what refuses to go away when you do not believe in it, and progress in neuroscience and genomics has made these politically comforting shibboleths (such as the non-existence of intelligence and the non-existence of race) untenable.

Rather than legislating facts, could we adopt a policy of agnosticism, and recommend that we "don't go there"? Scientists routinely avoid research that may have harmful consequences, such as injuring human subjects or releasing dangerous microorganisms. The problem with this line of thought is that it would restrict research based on its intellectual content rather than on its physical conduct. Ideas are connected to other ideas, often in unanticipated ways, and restrictions on content could cripple freedom of inquiry and distort the intellectual landscape.

Also, there are positive reasons to study the genetics of groups. Until the day that every person is issued a CD containing his or her genome, medicine will need the statistical boost of data on group differences when targeting tests and treatments to those most likely to benefit from them. Remember that the CH&H study grew out of research aimed at reducing the enormous suffering caused by genetic diseases. Many have effects on the nervous and endocrine systems, and connections with the psychological traits of sufferers and carriers may be unavoidable. And of course the tests could refute claims of group differences as easily as they could confirm them.

The genetics of groups is also an exciting frontier in the study of history. Many Jews have been thrilled by the discoveries of a common Y-chromosome among many of today's kohanim (believed to be descendants of the priestly caste in ancient Judea, who were themselves the descendants of Aaron), of genetic commonalities between the Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jews traceable to a common ancestry in the Middle East, and of the presence of these genes in isolated communities in Africa and Asia that retain some Jewish rituals. Studies of the genes of African, American, and Australian populations could shed light on their prehistory, filling in pages that are sadly missing from the history of our species, as well as enlightening curious individuals about their genealogy.

In theory, we have the intellectual and moral tools to defuse the dangers. "Is" does not imply "ought." Group differences, when they exist, pertain to averages, not to individual men and women. There are geniuses and dullards, saints and sinners, in every race, ethnicity, and gender. Political equality is a commitment to universal human rights, and to policies that treat people as individuals rather than as representatives of groups; it is not an empirical claim that people are indistinguishable. Many commentators seem unwilling to grasp these points.

The revolution in human genomics has spawned profuse commentary about the perils of cloning and human genetic enhancement. But these fears may be misplaced. When people realize that cloning is just forgoing a genetically unique child for an identical twin of one of the parents, rather than resurrecting a soul or investing in an organ farm, I suspect no one will want to do it. And when they realize that most genes have costs as well as benefits (a gene might raise a child's IQ but also predispose him to a genetic disease), "designer babies" will lose whatever appeal they have. In contrast, the power to uncover genetic and evolutionary roots of group differences in psychological traits is both more likely to materialize and more incendiary in its consequences. And it is a prospect that we are, intellectually and emotionally, very poorly equipped to confront.

This is complicated, so maybe I don't understand all of this. I want to say that even if a person has a certain gene that might make them better or not better at acheiving a goal, why do some people adapt and do better? I think it is because they have learned how to adapt by looking around them to see where their opportunity is. They don't blame racism for their troubles and ask to be helped. They find thier own path. So in America there is more freedom to find opportunity for black people, than in other countrys.
 
Quote from jem:

I believe all people are responsible for their choices as individuals, I blame liberal programs for our problems as a society.

Stop giving away the freebies and everything else will fall into place. That's the way nature intended things to be. Those that don't take care of their responsibilities will fall by the wayside.........just the way its supposed to be.

There, that's simple isn't it.
 
Quote from AlpineTrout:

Stop giving away the freebies and everything else will fall into place...
I really sympathize with those in need. Yet, there's a fine line to walk, an important balance to keep, between helping (temporarily) someone in need, and creating a whole class of people who take that help for granted and use it to justify their unwillingness to work hard like those whose taxes pay for that help. I can help my daughter with her homework here and there, but, if I end up doing it for her regularly, I'd be hurting her in the long run.
 
5. David Stockman an economist who worked for Nixon wrote a book in the early eighties showing and predicting that welfare would marginalize black men, making them unnecessary as providers and cause a break down of black families and culture.
His prediction have proven out.

-------------------

Agreed. Welfare kicked the man out of the house.

Secondly, I agree that redlining basically caused the growth of the ghetto's. A slum "rental" has the highest returns.

Also, the blacks are sorted directly by income (project housing). Here's an apt, if you make more than 500 dollars a month you are out. If the tenant gets promoted on the job or has a salary increase, out he goes and is replaced by another "poor" tenant. We drive by the projects and have the impression that the "race" of the housing is all bad. No it is not, it is us seeing the different poor people everyday with a different face.

Imagine getting kicked out your suburb house because of income qualifications. Oh you make too much money, you can't live in this zip code.

Mortgage money flows to "fresh" undeveloped land and with it the dependence on the auto.

Big noise about urban renewal, DOA. You want urban renewal start with the schools, charter schools are the nearest thing to hope and they are getting beatin down at every turn from the unions.

Shut down those inner city paraochial school, they don't want to run a day care for dysfunctional students with state mandated social criteria and I don't blame them.
 
Quote from Moe27:

yeah stay focus on the black man while your world around you is falling apart, your getting smaller and smaller with little power, thats what happen when your lossing control, you focus on the small picture while the big picture is taking over. times up.

Well you see, when blacks are breaking into homes and businesses all over the city and carjacking cars and so many are standing on street corners selling drugs and on and on............I'd say that IS the big picture. We're just discussing ways for you guys to get your act together, so that some of us don't have to work so hard to hold on to our own shit.
 
I remember reading that case in Business School where a poor widow and welfare recipient worked odd jobs here and there, babysat for other mothers, stayed out of trouble, ate saltine crackers and peanut butter, fed stale bread (that she was getting for free) soaked in milk to her children, maximized whatever she could get from her church and the local soup kitchen where she was helping out for some extra supplies, and managed to save a few thousand $$ at the bank, hoping to get out of that misery.

The bank manager alerted the welfare people WHO TOOK THAT MONEY AWAY! Back to welfare from month to month until the kids grow old enough.

True story. Never underestimate some civil servants' stupidity and indifference to the plight of the needy, especially those who show even a modicum of independent spirit or desire to "get out of the system." Sad but true. :(
 
Quote from Yannis:

I remember reading that case in Business School where a poor widow and welfare recipient worked odd jobs here and there, babysat for other mothers, stayed out of trouble, ate saltine crackers and peanut butter, fed stale bread (that she was getting for free) soaked in milk to her children, maximized whatever she could get from her church and the local soup kitchen where she was helping out for some extra supplies, and managed to save a few thousand $$ at the bank, hoping to get out of that misery.

The bank manager alerted the welfare people WHO TOOK THAT MONEY AWAY! Back to welfare from month to month until the kids grow old enough.

True story. Never underestimate some civil servants' stupidity and indifference to the plight of the needy, especially those who show even a modicum of independent spirit or desire to "get out of the system." Sad but true. :(

Its true, substantial adjustments to the system are necessary.

But the bottom line is personal responsibility: If you can't afford to have children, don't have them. And if you're the man, and you screw up, then cowboy up and take care of your own kids.
 
Yannis, tenants will do it to each other. Any small sum from an inheritance or lotto , they buy a new tv or new curtains and they can"t let anyone in their apartment for fear someone is jealous and will report them. This creates anonymity and fear among fellow tenants.

If the money is enough to give them a choice, they are gone. System has failed yet repeated again and again since the first projects was built (name your city they're all the same).
 
Back
Top