This is something I have been thinking about quite a bit for the last few days.

One thing I keep hearing about is that there are to many blacks in jail.  It comes up all over the place.  But for some reason, nobody asks (or is afraid to ask) the real question:  Why are so many blacks commiting crimes?

And I do not mean it as in "why are blacks thugs".  But I do think that a certain emulation of the "thug life" has something to do with it.  This last week (Thursday night), I was attacked by 2 black youths.  They were in their early 20's, and assaulted me with metal pipes.  And why did they do this?

Because they wanted the pizzas I was delivering.

This was not a random attack.  It was a planned ambush.  They called in an order to an empty house.  And when I showed up to deliver the pizza, they jumped me.  And there is no question that they were black.  And even more disturbing, this was the 4th attack on a Domino's driver in my community this year.  In every single instance, the perp was black (as was one of the people attacked, who also happened to be pregnant).

To me, a criminal is a criminal.  I do not care if he is black, white, red, yellow, green, purple, or plaid.  And I do not give a damn if they live in the ghetto, or come from a rich family.  All I have ever cared about is that thugs be locked up away from "civilized people".

I quit my secondary job, because this showed me that it simply was not worth it.  I did not need the job, I only did it for the extra money.  But getting beat by 2 punks with metal pipes for $15 and pizzas, nothing is worth that.

Holy crap!  You got assaulted with metal pipes for pizzas? 
I'm sorry to hear that, Mush.  Glad you weren't too badly hurt. 
You feel understandably shaken up and angry after you have been a victim of violent crime.

If you are the victim of crimes numerous times compounded with pain and anger of growing up poor, often being neglected and battered, other times witnessing domestic violence, you might have rage and deprivation as foundations for your consciousness. 
African-Americans often emerge from childhood with just such a syndrome. 

Imagine being assaulted and robbed a dozen times in the past year?

It is easy then to imagine how so many young Black males lose their capacity for empathy and moral restraint.  Violence begets violence.  If you're hurt enough, you'll come out thrashing at whatever you can find.

No excuses here.  Just reasons.

If you posit "Crime and Race," you have a question to which somebody will hate any answer.  I'm not expecting to win friends here.

In my experience, many African-American men feel they have been deprived of something and are owed something.  Sometimes this comes out as "the white power structure owes me."  However, I'm going beyond specifics to the core of what I call the psychology of despair.  From day one Blacks get the message they are "less than."  You damage a person's sense of self-worth in the formative years, and the result is a need to get even. 

No, it's not rational to assault a pizza delivery driver.  In fact, it's criminal, foolish, and self-defeating, not to mention how counterproctive it is to have one more white man asking why black men commit crimes.  I'm not taking about the rational or the pragmantic--not even the calculated kind that goes into pre-meditated crime.  I'm talking about a primal psycholigical condition of despair.  This condition does not diminish the sufferers capacity for reason nor does it absolve him from the consequences of his actions.  The psychology of despair is the result of living in a severely compromised environment--economically, educationally, and socially.

If you ask why a "blacks commit crimes."  There are two basic answers: Nature and Nurture.  I believe it's the latter.  In the past fifty years it has become taboo to state explicitly that blacks have a genetic predisposition to crime.  However, it is evident this is what many on the Right believe.  If I make the case for Nurture as I have above, albeit rather obtusely, the knee-jerk response from the Right is: You are making excuses for bad behavior.  You are mollycoddling criminals.  You are falling for liberal white guilt.  You are not holding these people accountable.  When NO environmental reason is acceptable, what's left besides calling them natural born criminals.

Others on the Right like to say, it's not black people, it's their leaders.  It's Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who discourage personal responsiblity and play "blame the white man," and it's the liberal intellectual elite and the liberal media that amplifies this poisonous message.

Indeed, there was a brief period of "radical chic" in the late '60s and early '70s in which white liberals did lionize the Black Panthers and even give the nod to common street thugs because nothing in the world could be as evil as what whites---all whites---did to blacks for the past 400 years.  "Radical chic" was specious and ephemeral.  However, it gave rise to the idea that liberals respect black criminals more than the crime victims.  Right-wingers like Ann Coulter still push the idea today. 

I'm sorry again you got assaulted and I would not excuse the dastardly act by those individuals...but you asked "why" and I responded.  Unfortunately, I don't think I've said what you or many others on this board want to hear!
:(

If you ask why a "blacks commit crimes."  There are two basic answers: Nature and Nurture.  I believe it's the latter.  In the past fifty years it has become taboo to state explicitly that blacks have a genetic predisposition to crime.  However, it is evident this is what many on the Right believe.  If I make the case for Nurture as I have above, albeit rather obtusely, the knee-jerk response from the Right is: You are making excuses for bad behavior.  You are mollycoddling criminals.  You are falling for liberal white guilt.  You are not holding these people accountable.  When NO environmental reason is acceptable, what's left besides calling them natural born criminals.


Actually, that is not what I am saying at all.  Myself, I see criminals as criminals, and nothing more.

What really bothers me is that I was listening to some talk show on NPR earlier that day, and somebody was whining that "to many black men are in jail", and that it was wrong.  The gal actually stated that jails should be set up on a quota system, and that once a certain percentage of blacks had been jailed, that no more should be incarcerated.

So in other words, if the guys that attacked me later that night should ever be caught (which is doubtfull, even though the very next day I found some of the pizza boxes next door, in the trash of a barber shop next to where I was assaulted), they should be let go if there are already to many blacks in jail.  Absolute insanity!

Personally, I do not blame this on their being black.  I blame it on some parts of what is plaguing black culture.  I blame it on the glorifying of "Thug Life".  I blame it on the prevelance of gangs, both in big towns like LA, and the "Wanna Be" gangs of small towns like Dothan Alabama.  I blame it on the widespread epidemic of unwed mothers in the black community.  I place it on the widespread use of drugs.  I also place it on the shoulders of people like "Miss Bleeding Heart" on the radio, who thinks that most of the blacks in jail are innocent.

When the assault ended, I was finally able to use my cell phone and call for help.  And 2 people came out to make sure I was alright, one of them had called 911 while the attack was taking place.  They were black also.  I am not stupid, and I know that blacks are not bad.  Nor are they "predisposed" to be criminals.  But sadly, there is a part of the culture that actually seems to glorify that.

You have movies that make gang life seem glamerous.  That shooting people, pimping, and selling drugs is a way to "get ahead in life".  You have people in the music industry who brag about being gang members and how many times they have been shot.  Instead of emulating people like Dr. King who preached non-violence, they instead try to emulate 50 Cent and Snoop Dog.

As I was running down the street yelling for help, nobody came out to help me.  Nobody.  I saw people looking out the windows and standing on their porches, watching like it was a spectator sport.  And only 1 person other then me even called 911.  Yet all around the neighborhood there are signs about "Neighborhood Watch".  What a load of coprolite.  The "Watch" is seeing "The Man" get what is comming to him by going into their neighborhood.

And that night, there was only 1 other driver working.  She is 20, and just had a baby a month ago.  If it is anything, I am gratefull that it was me that responded and not her.  In fact, I am glad it was me any not any of the other drivers.  Half of them are in their 40's, and nowhere near as good a shape as I am in.  And half of them are women.  I only got hit once with the pole, and had a MagLight, so the punk could not get to close or risk getting a caved in head.  I am lucky that one concentrated on getting the food out of my car.  If both had gone after me, nothing would have saved me from a savage beating.

No, it is not "Blacks" I question.  It is this "Thug Culture" that the lower classes seem to have embraced.  I have even had a guy a few months ago offer to exchange grass for his pizza!  I mean, how stupid is that?  He was lucky it was not one of our other drivers, who was a Reserve Sheriff Deputy.

And ironically, the guy that attacked me is lucky.  Last week I applied for my Concealed Carry permit.  If I had done that 2 weeks ago, I would have been armed when I was attacked.  Then he would have really looked stupid, bringing a metal pole to a gun fight.  Because I would not have hesitated in shooting him down.  My 10 years of Marine training does not cover such things as "warning shots".  I would have shot him without hesitation "center mass", right in the chest.

I have friends on the Dothan PD.  I talked to one yesterday, and I was the 3rd driver attacked with the same MO, in the same neighborhood.  And I was the only one that was not hospitalized.  This is because instead of doing the expected (raise my hands and plead), I reacted.  I started to yell for help, and ran so that first my car was between them and me, then running down a well lit street, MagLight in hand.  It was somewhat of a "Mexican Standoff".  He could not swing to hard at me, for fear of getting smacked with my light.  But I could not strike at him freely, since the pole gave him a 2' reach advantage over me.  The chase ended about 50 yards from my car, at which time I think he realized he was alone without support, with a guy that was obviously willing to fight back if need be.

This was a planned and coordinated ambush.  And in 6 months of delivering, this was the very first time I took my MagLight with me when I left my car.  My instinct told me something was wrong, and I was right.  However, I am sure that those 2 thugs learned something also, and next time it may be a lot harder on the person they attack.

There are two questions to be asked: is it that black men (and ISTM that it's a lot more men than women that we're talking about here) commit more crime, or is it that they are more likely to be found guilty and incarcerated than an equivalent white male committing the same crime?

The last time I looked at the evidence for this was a few years ago, so my figures are out of date, but there has been a statistically significant prejudice on the part of juries both here and in the US (though it has to be said considerably more so on that side of the pond), where juries are more likely to convict a black man, judges hand out longer sentences to black men and even the chances of a caution rather than arrest is way lower for black men.  Put all those together, and even where the black/white crime rate is similar, you'll end up with a surprisingly large over-representation of black men in prison.

The "thug culture" doesn't help, especially perception of it: if your jurors have been reading a lot about "black crime" in the media, they are inevitably going to be predisposed against a black defendent.

Will come back to this, but have to go and make some lunch before my son's cricket match...

Mushroom, glad you came through this relatively unscathed.

Concealed carry is still a viable option and it's amazing how wonderfully it works against these so called "tough guys with the thug mentality"  A few years ago when I was a process server, I caught up to this real azz and a couple of his buddies at his house and asked to speak to him privately, saving him the embarrassment of being served in the presence of others.  He must have known it was coming, because he asked me "how about me and my buddies just beat the sh** out of you instead" ??  Nice response, and they all were wearing big toothy grins until I pulled back the one side of my jacket and revealed a 6 inch barrelled .357 magnum in a shoulder rig....they decided that maybe beating me wasn't going to go as planned.  As another Former Marine, I agree on the use of warning shots, the first one at center mass in the first bad guy is the only warning shot the others (if any are present) will receive.

I'm certainly not about to proclaim that all blacks are criminals because it's not true, but there does seem to be a larger percentage who are black committing crimes of a street level nature, and the thug mentality, the glorification of drugs and drug money, and the continuing whining about being kept down is worn out and it's getting old.....that excuse is merely a broken record syndrome because many do not feel the desire to motivate themselves for something besides easy money and to break free of the old chains....

First off, 'Shroom, I hope that you are OK after the attack.  Did they actually beat you down, or did they simply threaten to do so? ???

Here in Picksburgh we have had two pizza guys murdered in the past year.  >:(



Actually, that is not what I am saying at all.  Myself, I see criminals as criminals, and nothing more.

What really bothers me is that I was listening to some talk show on NPR earlier that day, and somebody was whining that "to many black men are in jail", and that it was wrong.  The gal actually stated that jails should be set up on a quota system, and that once a certain percentage of blacks had been jailed, that no more should be incarcerated.

So in other words, if the guys that attacked me later that night should ever be caught (which is doubtfull, even though the very next day I found some of the pizza boxes next door, in the trash of a barber shop next to where I was assaulted), they should be let go if there are already to many blacks in jail.  Absolute insanity!

Personally, I do not blame this on their being black.  I blame it on some parts of what is plaguing black culture.  I blame it on the glorifying of "Thug Life".  I blame it on the prevelance of gangs, both in big towns like LA, and the "Wanna Be" gangs of small towns like Dothan Alabama.  I blame it on the widespread epidemic of unwed mothers in the black community.  I place it on the widespread use of drugs.  I also place it on the shoulders of people like "Miss Bleeding Heart" on the radio, who thinks that most of the blacks in jail are innocent.

I tend to agree with your analysis.  This is not a racial thing, it is what I would call cultural.  One of the big things that you mention is the prevalance of unwed mothers in the community.  When I was living in South Bend, there was a report that 70+% of black children were raised in single-mother homes, and in nearly HALF of those cases, the father had no involvement whatsoever in the kids' lived.

There was then a big outrage from the community saying that the newspaper report was "racist" and represented "cultural imperialism".  But it does not take a genius (nor a village) to see that a 70% illegitimacy rate is going to cause crime and incarceration.  This is where the whole "thug life" and "don't snitch" culture comes from.  These kids have not had a REAL MAN in their lives, so they conjur up the concepts of thug and collaborator as an ersatz role model.  The alpha male of these kiddie groups becomes the role model as to what constitutes a "Man".

As to having too many whites or blacks or hispanics in jail, the cold hard facts are that most crimes commited by blacks (80+% if I remember the stats correctly) are against blacks.   The New Pittsburgh Courier reports that in 2006, in my general area of Pittsburgh PA, the population is ~28% black, but 79% or murders were of black citizens, almost exclusively commited by blacks.  In 2007 so far those stats are holding, with 90% of the murderers of black people being black men. Whites commit most of their crimes against whites and so on.  If the justice system were discriminating, it would not care about all those black victims and would let the perps roam the streets more than it already does.

There is another stat (I can not recall the numbers) that also says that a black man convicted of murdering a white man is MUCH more likely to get the death penalty than a white guy who kills a black guy.  And while this is indeed an injustuce (and it needs to be changed) it does not explain the overwhelming incarceration rate for blacks murdering, beating, and selling drugs to blacks.

But there is also a "white trash" community (with stats within its community similar to the aforementioned black stats) and a "successful black" community out there.  So I agree with you that this is not a racial issue, it is cultural.

And you are going to see more "white trash" type crime as the white illegitimacy rates continue to climb (I'm talking about illegitimacy where mama and papa do not live together to raise the kids).  Strong families are a great crime deterrent (but of course not a guarantee).

not all black people are like this.  It's the whole thug/gangsta thing.  It's a total disregard for anyone but oneself. (let alone Whitey)  I'm not sure if these people even respect their own people.  I got slapped by a black girl once, I'm still not sure of what I did.  Coincidentally white kids and some adults are just as brutal.  When are people going to learn to live and let live?

There are two questions to be asked: is it that black men (and ISTM that it's a lot more men than women that we're talking about here) commit more crime, or is it that they are more likely to be found guilty and incarcerated than an equivalent white male committing the same crime?

The last time I looked at the evidence for this was a few years ago, so my figures are out of date, but there has been a statistically significant prejudice on the part of juries both here and in the US (though it has to be said considerably more so on that side of the pond), where juries are more likely to convict a black man, judges hand out longer sentences to black men and even the chances of a caution rather than arrest is way lower for black men.  Put all those together, and even where the black/white crime rate is similar, you'll end up with a surprisingly large over-representation of black men in prison.

The "thug culture" doesn't help, especially perception of it: if your jurors have been reading a lot about "black crime" in the media, they are inevitably going to be predisposed against a black defendent.

Will come back to this, but have to go and make some lunch before my son's cricket match...

Karma +1

Your ability to mount a judicial defense depends on how deep your pockets are.  Furthermore, I don't think the American courts are colorblind.

"Thug life" is just the language poor kids in the inner cities are using.  It is not the cause of crime.

I do agree the destruction of the family (eg. 70% out-of-wedlock births in certain segments of the population) is very destructive.

Some of the problems come out of misguided liberal ideas.  Most of them are a result of unjust economic policies.

I'm glad you escaped serious physical injury, Mushroon.



And ironically, the guy that attacked me is lucky.  Last week I applied for my Concealed Carry permit.  If I had done that 2 weeks ago, I would have been armed when I was attacked.  Then he would have really looked stupid, bringing a metal pole to a gun fight.  Because I would not have hesitated in shooting him down.  My 10 years of Marine training does not cover such things as "warning shots".  I would have shot him without hesitation "center mass", right in the chest.


Make sure you double tap - the shock from two impacts brings stopping rate close to 100%.

One of the things I don't understand is that even though there are programmes to help people from poverty ridden backgrounds, so often.. it seems almost like there's some sort of cultural obligation to crime.

I remember being at college with a black guy from East St. Louis. His whole tuition was paid for and because a portion of his living expenses were covered he was able to live quite close to school (which was a good area.) He was arrested for selling crack cocaine to school children.. I mean 12 year old kids, not high school students.

This isn't all that uncommon. There he was, an opportunity on a silver platter to excell but the desire to make a fast buck through nefarious purposes was too strong.

Growing up we really didn't have much money.. in fact, we were poor, but the only time I ever stole anything my Ma dragged my ass to the store and made me give it back to them and then my Dad kicked my ass later that day, I suppose that's not always the case, but that being said.. a lot of my friends were in the same boat, no money in the family, no jobs etc (Thatchers Britain  ::)) and they'd tell you the same story, it wouldn't be tolerated, theft etc.
So why is it that in these inner city communities which are indeed predominantly black, crime seems to be far more acceptable?

This is what it seems to come down to, in other poor areas although obviously crime is more prevalent than in affluent areas with the same racial mix, the crime rate in black areas is so much higher it baffles logic. The only conclusion I can come to is that through however many generations, in so many of these families, crime has become totally acceptable, seen as an easier way to make a living.. and in some ways I can understand it. After all, when you can make $10,000 working a year at McDonalds, or $10,000 in a month selling crack, which are you going to do?

I suppose the issue is a moral one, how do you break the cycle that perpetuates the idea that breaking the law to make a quick buck is acceptable?

Conservatives are correct on some of the analysis.  Amidst poverty one needs more than ever family and community cohesiveness.  I think the collapse of the family and the community--which was often centered around church--has amplified the sense of despair, nihilism, and rage poverty invokes. 

However, conservatives are not correct when they say all problems of poor people would be solved if the family and the church returned to prominance. 

A lot of people got trapped when industry left their cities. Detroit, Flint, Gary, Cleveland, and other rustbelt cities became islands of hopelessness.  There was no more frontier.  Nowhere left for folks to go.  Without the industrial underpinning to the economy, there was no cash circulating for the entrepeneur.  Capital fled from the inner cities. 

And it's getting worse.  The information society is getting the shaft now just like the industrial society.  Uncle Sam is digging his own grave.

In order to reduce crime, you have to increase hope.  That requires our society making a huge investment in people, rather than just amassing capital for the wealthy.  I don't see the willpower for such an investment.

::)

However, conservatives are not correct when they say all problems of poor people would be solved if the family and the church returned to prominance. 


I am a Conservative, as you know.  And I also do not believe in any kind of panacea.  Nothing will ever eliminate crime.  Some people simply want to be bad, and nothing can ever stop that.  Just look at the Menendez brothers.  Filthy rich, and they still gunned down both parents with shotguns.  OJ was pretty well off also, but something drove him to do atrocious things.

However, I do believe that family can be a large help.  As well as faith.  If there is one thing that faith helps in, is setting a person's "moral compass".  If you honestly believe in an afterlife, it makes it harder to go out and do horrible things, since you know that you will eventually have to pay for them (either in suffering in a form of hell, or even being reincarnated as a lower caste, or even a lower form of life).  And almost universally, religions revere life and encourage good deeds.


So why is it that in these inner city communities which are indeed predominantly black, crime seems to be far more acceptable?


I would not say "accepted", as much as "resigned to".

Remember, I am originally from LA.  And from 1985-1987, I lived in Compton.  From 2000-2002, I lived in Inglewood.  These are some of the worst crime areas in the nation, and also have some of the highest homicide rates.  But as somebody pointed out earlier, most of these crimes occured between blacks.  And the vast majority of it was either gang or drug related.  So as long as you were not involved in either of these, you were reasonably safe.

But I still never went out at night if I could avoid it, and I would not even think of leaving my car unlocked.  I can honestly say that in the last 4 years, I have not locked my car more then 2-3 times.  I think a lot of the crime is a form of "peer pressure", where doing things like this raises your status amongst your peers.  And even worse, it can lead to a sick form of "one upmanship", that can escalate things even more.  We have already seen this with deliver driver attacks in my area.  Over the last year, they have gone from simply strgon-arm robberies to attacks with pipes.  It is only a matter of time until they start to use guns.


I tend to agree with your analysis.  This is not a racial thing, it is what I would call cultural.  

There was then a big outrage from the community saying that the newspaper report was "racist" and represented "cultural imperialism".  But it does not take a genius (nor a village) to see that a 70% illegitimacy rate is going to cause crime and incarceration.  This is where the whole "thug life" and "don't snitch" culture comes from.  These kids have not had a REAL MAN in their lives, so they conjur up the concepts of thug and collaborator as an ersatz role model.  The alpha male of these kiddie groups becomes the role model as to what constitutes a "Man".

There is another stat (I can not recall the numbers) that also says that a black man convicted of murdering a white man is MUCH more likely to get the death penalty than a white guy who kills a black guy.  And while this is indeed an injustuce (and it needs to be changed) it does not explain the overwhelming incarceration rate for blacks murdering, beating, and selling drugs to blacks.

But there is also a "white trash" community (with stats within its community similar to the aforementioned black stats) and a "successful black" community out there.  So I agree with you that this is not a racial issue, it is cultural.

And you are going to see more "white trash" type crime as the white illegitimacy rates continue to climb (I'm talking about illegitimacy where mama and papa do not live together to raise the kids).  Strong families are a great crime deterrent (but of course not a guarantee).


There is one thing that I have noticed, and I think it is a major cause of problems in the "black community".  And that is housing projects.

I live in what is undoubtly one of the lowest standards of living in the nation.  High paying work is hard to find in this area.  However, there is an advantage in that as well.  When the standard of living is so low, housing is very affordable.  I currently pay $250 for a single apartment in a duplex.  And it is not hard to find a 3 bedroom house in this area for $400 a month.  And there are several mobile home companies in the area that specialize in selling brand new 3 bedroom 2 bath units on an acre of land for under $60k.

But I have been puzled since I moved here as to why we have 2 very large housing projects in Dothan.  And why they are around 98% black occupied.  To me, this simply makes no sense.  You can afford an apartment in this region even working a minimum wage job for goodness sakes.  But these kind of entitlements tend to give the community the idea that they can't do anything on their own.  And that they should get things because they deserve them.

However, the case of "Capitol Punishment" is really something else.  Remember, nobody is sentenced to death simply for killing somebody.  They either have to kill several people, or do it in a truely horrible way.  The vast majority of people on death row are not there for murder, but for multiple murders.  And the majority of people on death row are unquestionably bad people.  Like Dexter Johnson, the 19 year old sentenced to death in Texas last week.  He was convicted of basically executing 2 people, and is suspected in the murder of as many as 4 other people.  2 of his accomplices confessed to the murders, yet his mother still screams that he is innocent.

And yes, we do have "white trash crime".  I have seen it myself, since it is often from ignorant pricks who seem to place the blame of the world on minorities, and want to try and eliminate the "threat to their way of life".  And I condemn such actions just as strongly.  To me, there is simply life, and it is all equally sacred, as long as the life in question has not done something so horrible that I see no reason for them to continue.


There are two questions to be asked: is it that black men (and ISTM that it's a lot more men than women that we're talking about here) commit more crime, or is it that they are more likely to be found guilty and incarcerated than an equivalent white male committing the same crime?


I think part of this has to do with the crimes comitted.

One stat I remember is something like 10% of the people commit over 85% of the crimes.  Therefore, once somebody has been caught doing something, they are much more likely to be caught if they do it again.  Not only are fingerprints available of these people, but now we have other things like DNA.

And yes, men are much more likely to commit crimes then women.  This is even more so when it comes to violent crime.  And it is not all black, since the vast majority of serial killers are white.  After all, when was the last time that anybody can remember a serial killer profile as being a "black male"?  Even the initial profiles of the beltway snipers was for 1 or possibly 2 white males.  It was only after they were caught that it was shown that was not the case at all.

Personally, I would love to see crime and poverty vanish from the world.  But I don't see that ever happening.  Some people simply refuse to do things to help themselves.  They see it easier to prey on others then to work for themselves.  After all, why work for a living when you can simply take what you want if you are strong enough?  And if you are caught, then you can scream that it was society that made you do it.

Personally, I would love to see crime and poverty vanish from the world.  But I don't see that ever happening.  Some people simply refuse to do things to help themselves.  They see it easier to prey on others then to work for themselves.  After all, why work for a living when you can simply take what you want if you are strong enough?  And if you are caught, then you can scream that it was society that made you do it.

The funny thing (that's "funny" as in somewhat sadly ironic, rather than hilarious) is that the effort and loyalty some of these guys put into being "bad" would give a decent living if pointed in the right direction - but in a lot of cases the only experience a guy from the "ghetto" has is being turned down for work because of who he is/where he comes from.  The more supportive environment is the local gang...

Thing is, I hate the well-off white middle-class types (like me, if you take "well-off" with a pinch of salt) proposing solutions based on a half-assed analysis, and even worse trying to foist them onto people who really aren't looking for that kind of "help" so that it can salve their bleeding-heart conscience.  How many of these schemes actually work?  What they do leave is an impression that "we've done all we can for these people, and they still turn to crime - it must be something to do with *them*, their culture, their genetics, etc.", rather than analysing and saying "OK, maybe we were doing things the wrong way".

****

Addendum on the use of faith as a moral compass: I know good, moral people who have faith, and good, moral people who don't; likewise you get criminals of all types who profess both faith or a lack of it.  I'm afraid I simply do not believe that people derive their morals from their faith: the evidence is overwhelmingly against it.  The assertion that morals can *only* come from faith is a damaging one for society.

Addendum on the use of faith as a moral compass: I know good, moral people who have faith, and good, moral people who don't; likewise you get criminals of all types who profess both faith or a lack of it.  I'm afraid I simply do not believe that people derive their morals from their faith: the evidence is overwhelmingly against it.  The assertion that morals can *only* come from faith is a damaging one for society.


Do not take what I said wrong.  Faith and morality do not have to go together.  In fact, you have some people who use their faith as an excuse to commit horrible crimes (Eric Rudolph and Osama immediately come to mind there).

And much as there are "no atheists in foxholes", there are also few "atheists in prison".  A lot of people suddenly find religion in jail, because it can help with the parole board.  But the moment they are set free, most will never set foot in a church again until their next arrest.  When I did my stint in County Jail, most people there went to Sunday services.  Almost everybody had a bible appropriate to their faith, and claimed to follow it.  One in particular was a cellmate who was repenting what he had done to everybody and his brother.  He would go on and on about how he was going to change, and that he was sorry for what he had done.

The sad part is that he had a 3 year old daughter that he only got to spend 2 days with.  She was born while he was doing a stretch in state prison for assault.  Within 48 hours of his release, he was caught buying drugs, and was right back in jail for probation violation.  But he was not sorry for what he had done, he was only sorry that he had gotten caught.  Because every meal time, he continued his thug ways, and stole food from another cellmate.  And in the last 10 years, I am sure that he has been released again, and incarcerated yet again.

And much as there are "no atheists in foxholes", there are also few "atheists in prison".  A lot of people suddenly find religion in jail, because it can help with the parole board.

I'll not start the "no atheists in foxholes" argument... but as for the atheists in prison - have a look here for another story about why you get conversions in prison.

And, yes, it pisses me off that parole boards are influenced by someone saying they've found "God" and become a Christian in prison - there's no evidence that it affects their behaviour one iota once they're out.  If I had to depend on a parole board letting me out over there, I'd probably end up serving life for a speeding offence.

I am a Conservative, as you know.  And I also do not believe in any kind of panacea.  Nothing will ever eliminate crime.  Some people simply want to be bad, and nothing can ever stop that.  Just look at the Menendez brothers.  Filthy rich, and they still gunned down both parents with shotguns.  OJ was pretty well off also, but something drove him to do atrocious things.
No, I wouldn't say you can eliminate crime, but you can reduce crime.  Of course violent crime is present among the rich.  Just watch MSNBC for chrissakes!  Anyway, the rich don't need guns to commit crimes.  As Woody Guthrie said, "some will rob you with a gun, some will rob you with a fountain pen."  I think the Bush family is a crime syndicate, but that's another matter.  

However, I do believe that family can be a large help.  As well as faith.  If there is one thing that faith helps in, is setting a person's "moral compass".  If you honestly believe in an afterlife, it makes it harder to go out and do horrible things, since you know that you will eventually have to pay for them (either in suffering in a form of hell, or even being reincarnated as a lower caste, or even a lower form of life).  And almost universally, religions revere life and encourage good deeds.
My problem with religion is when violence, greed, and hypocrisy are done under its name.
As with a functional family, belonging to a church can give a person a sense of...well, belonging.  It doesn't make everything fine and dandy, but that's just the point.  In hardship, it can be a source of support, encouragement, and strength.  You are far less likely to commit crimes if you feel like you matter.  If you believe you have a stake in the well-being of the the community, you might not feel so nihilistic.  It might sound cornball, but everybody wants to be a somebody and nobody wants to be a nobody.  Religion (the real thing, not James Dobson/Pat Robertson/Louis Farrakhan) also counters the "every man for himself, whoever dies with the most toys wins" message spread by consumer capitalism and copied by street gangs.  "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is the opposite of what our pop culture feeds us.  

There is one thing that I have noticed, and I think it is a major cause of problems in the "black community".  And that is housing projects.
Both the public and the private sector thought housing projects would be easier than building an economy in which every person was entitled to a job with a living wage.  That's the way it went with welfare programs.  The original idea behind subsidized housing starting in the 1930s was housing for low income nuclear families.  That worked out OK.  By the 1960s, housing projects became ghettoes for female-headed households with no income but welfare payments.  Please, this is NOT to disparage the parenting capabilities of women.  However, I do believe a boy needs a father, especially when the going is tough.  Again, it comes back to economy.  It was easier to abandon these women with their children on the welfare rolls in these godawful projects than to help them become independent breadwinners.  The most tragic flaw of the welfare state was rules against "a man in the house."  If you're both unemployed and she receives welfare benefits, there is a great incentive for him NOT to marry her and NOT to move in with his children for she would lose those benefits.  Thus began the slow decimation of housing projects from the fall of Pruitt-Igoe in 1972 to the demolition of the last Robert Taylor building earlier this year.  The housing project as holding pen for the poorest of the poor is on its way out.  

These urban projects are 98% Black because poor Blacks were the majority trapped in the inner cities following deindustrialization, white flight, and redlining.  

It is a misconception, however, that Blacks are the majority of the general population on welfare.  It appeared that way because of visibility and concentration, for instance in two miles of 16-story high-rises along the Dan Ryan Expressway (Chicago's former Robert Taylor Homes).  White poverty is spread wider and thinner, but in far greater numbers given their percentage of the population, from poor triple-decker neighborhoods in the city, to rundown inner rings of suburban tracts, to trailer parks, tumbledown farmhouses, and shacks throughout the countryside.  

However, poverty in concentrate juxtaposed with the grandeur of tony condominiums and glass skyscrapers of the financial district is especially demoralizing and invidious.  The good life is a bus ride away yet a million miles beyond your reach.  When the values are not the values of family unity and community pride, but the values of TV commercials, you have a recipe for rage.

Personally, I would love to see crime and poverty vanish from the world.  But I don't see that ever happening.  Some people simply refuse to do things to help themselves.  They see it easier to prey on others then to work for themselves.  After all, why work for a living when you can simply take what you want if you are strong enough?  And if you are caught, then you can scream that it was society that made you do it.

You need a hell of a good lawyer to sell "society made me do it" to the judge and jury, and a hell of a good lawyer is what poor kids who mug you with iron pipes and hold up grocery stores do not get!
::)

I'll not start the "no atheists in foxholes" argument... but as for the atheists in prison - have a look here for another story about why you get conversions in prison.

And, yes, it pisses me off that parole boards are influenced by someone saying they've found "God" and become a Christian in prison - there's no evidence that it affects their behaviour one iota once they're out.  If I had to depend on a parole board letting me out over there, I'd probably end up serving life for a speeding offence.

Yeah, they all found Jesus in prison.  So tell me, if Jesus is so good, why is he always in prison?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/15/tard.gif

And all this time I have been giving bums money thinking it is Jesus in disguise!!

It can't be HE'S in jail with all those prisoners finding him! Thanks you saved me some $$$$! :D :D ;D ;D

Let me start by saying I'm glad to hear you weren't injured badly, Mushroom.

I think everyone has made some very good points on here.  Like Max, I also think it's a "nature vs. nurture" phenomenon.  I also think it's part of the cultural mentality of people who believe that people of the same "color" should stick together.  As I've said before, I had a very good friend who was white, but grew up in a predominately black part of town.  In college, he was basically shunned by the new "fraternity brothers" of his high school buddies.....why?  Simply because he was white and they were black.  Along with this goes the "it's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" comment that often follows when asked a question about black culture (of course, you can insert almost any minority in lieu of "black" and it's the same concept).  The issue I have with this is how are we supposed to learn about different cultures/genders/whatever if it's never explained to us?

AFA the "thug mentality" that goes hand in hand with crime, that's something I don't think I'll ever "understand."  Then again, I've never really had the opportunity to sit down with a criminal and ask them why they do what they do.  Although, I wouldn't accept the "because it's how I was raised" excuse.  IMO, that's just a scapegoat for taking the easy way out.  There are thousands of people who are raised in less than optimal situations who rise above what they've been brought up to believe and make a better life for themselves.

Along with this goes the "it's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" comment that often follows when asked a question about black culture (of course, you can insert almost any minority in lieu of "black" and it's the same concept).  The issue I have with this is how are we supposed to learn about different cultures/genders/whatever if it's never explained to us?


That reminds me os something that happened way back in 1993.

Back then, at least in LA there were a lot of people who were actually wearing T-sheeshs that said "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand".  Shirts like this were widely seen on college campuses in the area (I was attending Pierce Community College at the time and saw them myself).

Late that year, a group of whites started to wear shirts that stated "It's a caucasian concept, you would not comprehend".  And oh boy, how the fireworks flew!  The t-shirts were banned, because people were claiming it was racist, and implied that blacks were stupid.  The students claimed that it was both a "freedom of speech" issue, and that it was not racist, but simply satire on another shirt that was widely worn.  But that was tossed out and they were banned.

They then tried to get the original "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" shirts banned because they must be equally racist, and that was rejected.

And people wonder why I consider most college campuses insane.  ::)

That reminds me os something that happened way back in 1993.

Back then, at least in LA there were a lot of people who were actually wearing T-sheeshs that said "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand".  Shirts like this were widely seen on college campuses in the area (I was attending Pierce Community College at the time and saw them myself).

Late that year, a group of whites started to wear shirts that stated "It's a caucasian concept, you would not comprehend".  And oh boy, how the fireworks flew!  The t-shirts were banned, because people were claiming it was racist, and implied that blacks were stupid.  The students claimed that it was both a "freedom of speech" issue, and that it was not racist, but simply satire on another shirt that was widely worn.  But that was tossed out and they were banned.

They then tried to get the original "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" shirts banned because they must be equally racist, and that was rejected.

And people wonder why I consider most college campuses insane.   ::)


Mushroom, im glad you are alright.  Im also glad that you didn't have to resort to violence as well in this situation. 

Its pretty sad anymore that if you mention anything caucasion, it might automatically be racist.  It almost seems that caucasion is associated with slavery.  However, I dont remember myself or any of my relatives ever owning a slave.  The only way to get past certain atrocities of the past, we have to learn from them and move forward.  Cant ever move forward if everyone is content with sticking to their own cultures and pissing on everyone else.  The same thing with black people calling each other the "N" word, but yet if a caucasion person ever would say that, it is a racist thing.  I guess it matters what context you use it in, but I would think it derogatory however you use it. 

I hate the poor picked on me way of thinking.  I know there are people who try hard, and I know there are people who just think they have no other way out but to resort to violence.  I haven't ever looked at the ratio between cultures and crimes, but I often wonder why it seems the U.S. as a whole has one of the highest violent crime rates in all of the civilized nations.   

Because we glorify guns and violence and consider sex and drugs to be evil.

Because we glorify guns and violence and consider sex and drugs to be evil.



Reminds me of a song by the Toyes called "What's so bad about a nipple" which I have posted on here many times.



Cat

Reminds me of a song by the Toyes called "What's so bad about a nipple" which I have posted on here many times.



Cat


Um, nothing.  ;D

Um, nothing.  ;D



Here are the lyrics


http://dmdb.org/lyrics/nipple.html



Cat

I know there are people who try hard, and I know there are people who just think they have no other way out but to resort to violence.  I haven't ever looked at the ratio between cultures and crimes, but I often wonder why it seems the U.S. as a whole has one of the highest violent crime rates in all of the civilized nations.     



That's because we presume we are civilized nation!
::)


That reminds me os something that happened way back in 1993.

Back then, at least in LA there were a lot of people who were actually wearing T-sheeshs that said "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand".  Shirts like this were widely seen on college campuses in the area (I was attending Pierce Community College at the time and saw them myself).

Late that year, a group of whites started to wear shirts that stated "It's a caucasian concept, you would not comprehend".  And oh boy, how the fireworks flew!  The t-shirts were banned, because people were claiming it was racist, and implied that blacks were stupid.  The students claimed that it was both a "freedom of speech" issue, and that it was not racist, but simply satire on another shirt that was widely worn.  But that was tossed out and they were banned.

They then tried to get the original "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" shirts banned because they must be equally racist, and that was rejected.

And people wonder why I consider most college campuses insane.  ::)

I remember the whole "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" craze.  I never liked it because it suggested they didn't want to tell me.  The same people were raising a fuss about "diversity" and "multiculturalism."  So if I don't understand this "black thing," you're going to play it cool and not tell me?  If I said, "It's a black thing and I don't care," you wouldn't thing that was very cool!

The message I got from a lot of the militants was I was despicable because I was white and my ancestors committed atrocities, but I'd damn well better not object to the militants hating me!  Or else!
:o

I also remember the "It's a caucasian thing, you wouldn't comprehend" t-shirts.  They didn't get banned at UMass though.  I think it was just a couple of guys from the Republican Club wearing them, and those clowns went out of their way to make themselves despicable.  I don't mean because they were espousing minority political opinions on campus, but because they did it in the manner of David Spade!
::)

The only way to get past certain atrocities of the past, we have to learn from them and move forward.  Cant ever move forward if everyone is content with sticking to their own cultures and pissing on everyone else.  The same thing with black people calling each other the "N" word, but yet if a caucasion person ever would say that, it is a racist thing.  I guess it matters what context you use it in, but I would think it derogatory however you use it. 






Good points..

I think the majority of people would LIKE to forget about slavery and the atrocities associated with that era, but there are many blacks in America and elsewhere today that keep reminding us of it, and keep it fresh in their minds.

Personally, and this is going to piss off a certain segment on this board, but that can't be helped...I don't know of anybody in my family tree that owned slaves either, and I'm damned sick of apologizing for being a caucasian...

These people like Jessie and Al need to quit feeling crapped on because they were born black and to get on with it without the constant racial overtones to every breath they take....they're stirring the pot and it needs to stop....

Because we glorify guns and violence and consider sex and drugs to be evil.

How can you say we consider sex and drugs "evil" when Viagra sells in the billions?
:D

Good points..

I think the majority of people would LIKE to forget about slavery and the atrocities associated with that era, but there are many blacks in America and elsewhere today that keep reminding us of it, and keep it fresh in their minds.

Personally, and this is going to piss off a certain segment on this board, but that can't be helped...I don't know of anybody in my family tree that owned slaves either, and I'm damned sick of apologizing for being a caucasian...

These people like Jessie and Al need to quit feeling crapped on because they were born black and to get on with it without the constant racial overtones to every breath they take....they're stirring the pot and it needs to stop....


If you forgot something, you are doomed to repeat them. It's also insulting to tell a group that they should forget a major event in their cultural lives. I sincerely doubt you'd tell Jewish folks to forget the Holocaust. No one's telling you to apologize for being Caucasian since it's not your fault,  :D. But the fact remains, this country sugarcoats the event and continues to perpetuate such beliefs, albeit in covert ways. Racism exists in this country and what's more worse than any racist are those who want to sweep it under the rug and act as if isn't around.

As for the "It's a "insert group here" thing, you wouldn't understand" comments, think of it this way. Many whites aren't aware of cultures outside of theirs, which perpetuates cultural misunderstandings, so why not be upfront about it? I still get some whites that think they could touch my hair out of the blue. Hello??? The opposite "It's a Caucasian thing, you wouldn't comprehend" thing is hilarious considering I can turn on the tv and see far more "mainstream" items than anything else.

If you forgot something, you are doomed to repeat them. It's also insulting to tell a group that they should forget a major event in their cultural lives. I sincerely doubt you'd tell Jewish folks to forget the Holocaust. No one's telling you to apologize for being Caucasian since it's not your fault,  :D. But the fact remains, this country sugarcoats the event and continues to perpetuate such beliefs, albeit in covert ways. Racism exists in this country and what's more worse than any racist are those who want to sweep it under the rug and act as if isn't around.

As for the "It's a "insert group here" thing, you wouldn't understand" comments, think of it this way. Many whites aren't aware of cultures outside of theirs, which perpetuates cultural misunderstandings, so why not be upfront about it? I still get some whites that think they could touch my hair out of the blue. Hello??? The opposite "It's a Caucasian thing, you wouldn't comprehend" thing is hilarious considering I can turn on the tv and see far more "mainstream" items than anything else.


I don't apologise for being caucasian, but I apologise for somebody else being caucasian.

As for the "It's a "insert group here" thing, you wouldn't understand" comments, think of it this way. Many whites aren't aware of cultures outside of theirs, which perpetuates cultural misunderstandings, so why not be upfront about it?
This is a perfect example of my problem with the whole "it's a XXX thing, you wouldn't understand."  People go on and on about how whites "aren't aware of cultures outside of their own," but when we try, we get crap like this.  How on earth am I (as a white person) supposed to learn about other cultures when all I get is the "you're not X so you won't understand"?  It almost seems as if people don't want to try to explain whatever so they can keep harping on the ignorance of whites regarding other cultures/sugarcoating the past/whatever which only serves to keep the country divided.  Maybe that's a simplistic/pessimistic way of looking at it, but I'm tired of being told I don't understand things when no one is willing to try and explain.....

That reminds me os something that happened way back in 1993.


Late that year, a group of whites started to wear shirts that stated "It's a caucasian concept, you would not comprehend".  And oh boy, how the fireworks flew!  The t-shirts were banned, because people were claiming it was racist, and implied that blacks were stupid.  The students claimed that it was both a "freedom of speech" issue, and that it was not racist, but simply satire on another shirt that was widely worn.  But that was tossed out and they were banned.

They then tried to get the original "It's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" shirts banned because they must be equally racist, and that was rejected.

And people wonder why I consider most college campuses insane.   ::)


Heh heh... That reminds me a few years back at Penn State, they had this big "GAD" promotion.. Gay Awareness Days.  Banners and everythang

So an enterprising group of students decided to also have an official "B.A.D." promotion for "Beastiality Awareness Days".  There was a huge outcry but in the end the campus authorities could not stop it, as it was, indeed a "diversity event".  ;D

This is a perfect example of my problem with the whole "it's a XXX thing, you wouldn't understand."  People go on and on about how whites "aren't aware of cultures outside of their own," but when we try, we get crap like this.  How on earth am I (as a white person) supposed to learn about other cultures when all I get is the "you're not X so you won't understand"?  It almost seems as if people don't want to try to explain whatever so they can keep harping on the ignorance of whites regarding other cultures/sugarcoating the past/whatever which only serves to keep the country divided.  Maybe that's a simplistic/pessimistic way of looking at it, but I'm tired of being told I don't understand things when no one is willing to try and explain.....


If you are genuine, you have no worries. Sometimes it's obvious that the understanding isn't really there (and believe me, I've witnessed it). I have a diverse set of friends who surround themselves on a daily basis with various people and genuinely want to know about other cultures as opposed to having to feel a sense of obligation to know others and that's why they are part of my life. I don't understand this "trying". Just do it.

What's so hard about having a conversation with someone that may be, on the outside, different from you from a real sense. No, not everyone's going to be open to it from their own experiences (many feel that there's so much material out there that is conveniently ignored that they don't feel obligated to provide some "teachings" to you; thus, they may not be open to you for fear of ulterior motives). For example, why is that one individual person of color (e.g. Black, Hispanic, Asian) has to speak as a representative of an entire and diverse group with regards to whites?

First off, I'm a fellow American, so we already have something in common. Start from there. Find something that you can relate to with the other person that doesn't have to do with race. It's really not hard. It's basic socialization. Feel to ask away of me. I'm not a representative. I'm me. But I'll be happy to help you.  :)


Heh heh... That reminds me a few years back at Penn State, they had this big "GAD" promotion.. Gay Awareness Days.  Banners and everythang

So an enterprising group of students decided to also have an official "B.A.D." promotion for "Beastiality Awareness Days".  There was a huge outcry but in the end the campus authorities could not stop it, as it was, indeed a "diversity event".   ;D


I would've laughed at that event. Don't get me started on Penn State though,  ;).

If you are genuine, you have no worries. Sometimes it's obvious that the understanding isn't really there (and believe me, I've witnessed it). I have a diverse set of friends who surround themselves on a daily basis with various people and genuinely want to know about other cultures as opposed to having to feel a sense of obligation to know others and that's why they are part of my life. I don't understand this "trying". Just do it.

What's so hard about having a conversation with someone that may be, on the outside, different from you from a real sense. No, not everyone's going to be open to it from their own experiences (many feel that there's so much material out there that is conveniently ignored that they don't feel obligated to provide some "teachings" to you; thus, they may not be open to you for fear of ulterior motives). For example, why is that one individual person of color (e.g. Black, Hispanic, Asian) has to speak as a representative of an entire and diverse group with regards to whites?

First off, I'm a fellow American, so we already have something in common. Start from there. Find something that you can relate to with the other person that doesn't have to do with race. It's really not hard. It's basic socialization. Feel to ask away of me. I'm not a representative. I'm me. But I'll be happy to help you.  :)



ditto

This is a perfect example of my problem with the whole "it's a XXX thing, you wouldn't understand."  People go on and on about how whites "aren't aware of cultures outside of their own," but when we try, we get crap like this.  How on earth am I (as a white person) supposed to learn about other cultures when all I get is the "you're not X so you won't understand"?  It almost seems as if people don't want to try to explain whatever so they can keep harping on the ignorance of whites regarding other cultures/sugarcoating the past/whatever which only serves to keep the country divided.  Maybe that's a simplistic/pessimistic way of looking at it, but I'm tired of being told I don't understand things when no one is willing to try and explain.....



Of course you must understand, too, that sometimes when approached by whites who "just want to understand" can get very tiring when they start asking you questions about gangs because they assume you must know about them.  I know as much about gangs as any of my white neighbors, but for some reason they think I must have the inside track.  They don't want to know, why the "n" word is so offensive, what is was like to live in the 50s, why being "helped" at in a department store(when no one else can find a clerk anywhere) can sometimes be irritating. Then you have situations like when I go to Sigs, a very upper class, monied town, and you are at the town beach and the conversation doesn't go beyond, "so, do you live in town?"  I don't know how many times that has been the conversation stopper, because the whole reason for the conversation was whether or not the propery values were about to crash.  I get very tired sometimes with the questions and comments  "wow, you do tan!" It gets tiring, it gets old. 

Personally, and this is going to piss off a certain segment on this board, but that can't be helped...I don't know of anybody in my family tree that owned slaves either, and I'm damned sick of apologizing for being a caucasian...

These people like Jessie and Al need to quit feeling crapped on because they were born black and to get on with it without the constant racial overtones to every breath they take....they're stirring the pot and it needs to stop....

Looking at my ancestry (a mix of Russian/Polish Jewish/German and English yeomanry), I not only cannot find anyone who might even possibly have owned, traded or even remotely benefited from the slave trade... it has always struck me as equally racist to demand "apologies" for the slave trade from people who had nothing to do with it and just happen to have a white skin.  You might equally request apologies from one set of African tribes who willingly sold members of other African tribes into slavery 'cause they weren't from the same tribe.


Of course you must understand, too, that sometimes when approached by whites who "just want to understand" can get very tiring when they start asking you questions about gangs because they assume you must know about them. 

Does that actually happen?  Sorry, not that I mean to doubt you, more that I despair of the sort of mind that makes that sort of connection based purely on skin colour.  I don't think it would cross my mind to ask somebody about gangs and gang culture unless I actually knew they were involved in some way.

I suppose a topical twist on this would be asking a Muslim why the terrorists do what they do...

Looking at my ancestry (a mix of Russian/Polish Jewish/German and English yeomanry), I not only cannot find anyone who might even possibly have owned, traded or even remotely benefited from the slave trade... it has always struck me as equally racist to demand "apologies" for the slave trade from people who had nothing to do with it and just happen to have a white skin.  You might equally request apologies from one set of African tribes who willingly sold members of other African tribes into slavery 'cause they weren't from the same tribe.


Many African-Americans do not expect nor want an apology from you, or anyone else. It's a symbolic gesture from the government, not the people itself. In fact, I think the statement about apologies is ridiculously old since almost no one in the community expects it. It just seems that is one of the first things to stem out of someone's mouth when they don't have much to say, or when they want to use a crutch to deny other issues.

Many African-Americans do not expect nor want an apology from you, or anyone else. It's a symbolic gesture from the government, not the people itself.
I'm not sure if what was being talked about was African-Americans or the UK/African descendents being interviewed, and I'm sure the vast majority are perfectly sensible... just that every so often (be it on some anniversary or other) you get some guy on the radio/TV who makes me want to bash my head against the wall.


It just seems that is one of the first things to stem out of someone's mouth when they don't have much to say, or when they want to use a crutch to deny other issues.

I think you have a point... just that "apologies" have been mentioned on the news a few times over the past month or two (not just slavery, but the Catholic church's peccadillos, the Irish potato famine etc. etc.)

.
Does that actually happen?  Sorry, not that I mean to doubt you, more that I despair of the sort of mind that makes that sort of connection based purely on skin colour.  I don't think it would cross my mind to ask somebody about gangs and gang culture unless I actually knew they were involved in some way.

I suppose a topical twist on this would be asking a Muslim why the terrorists do what they do...


Yeah, it happens.  Hey, I once had a guy who saw a picture of gay parade and was surprised that he saw African Americans in it.  He said "I didn't think you people had that problem, too."  ::)

If you are genuine, you have no worries. Sometimes it's obvious that the understanding isn't really there (and believe me, I've witnessed it). I have a diverse set of friends who surround themselves on a daily basis with various people and genuinely want to know about other cultures as opposed to having to feel a sense of obligation to know others and that's why they are part of my life. I don't understand this "trying". Just do it.

What's so hard about having a conversation with someone that may be, on the outside, different from you from a real sense. No, not everyone's going to be open to it from their own experiences (many feel that there's so much material out there that is conveniently ignored that they don't feel obligated to provide some "teachings" to you; thus, they may not be open to you for fear of ulterior motives). For example, why is that one individual person of color (e.g. Black, Hispanic, Asian) has to speak as a representative of an entire and diverse group with regards to whites?

First off, I'm a fellow American, so we already have something in common. Start from there. Find something that you can relate to with the other person that doesn't have to do with race. It's really not hard. It's basic socialization. Feel to ask away of me. I'm not a representative. I'm me. But I'll be happy to help you.  :)


I understand basic socialization.  I don't automatically jump to cultural questions when I meet someone new.  And, I don't expect any 1 person to be a spokesperson for their entire culture/gender/political party/whatever, but if I'm having a regular conversation with someone and the conversation turns to something within their culture/gender/political party/whatever and I ask about it, I'd appreciate an answer other than "you're white/female/Democrat/whatever so you won't understand."  If a man asked me something about being a woman, I'd try to explain.  Granted, he probably won't understand fully, but at least I try.  It's pretty offensive and prejudiced to automatically assume that someone who asks someone else a particular question has an ulterior motive.  I don't feel obligated to learn about other cultures, but it is something that interests me.  Sorry, but it pisses me off that if I ask an innocent question based on my curiosity about something, it's assumed that I'm doing it out of some sense of "obligation" or have an ulterior motive.  Guess that's just me, though.



ditto

Of course you must understand, too, that sometimes when approached by whites who "just want to understand" can get very tiring when they start asking you questions about gangs because they assume you must know about them.  I know as much about gangs as any of my white neighbors, but for some reason they think I must have the inside track.  They don't want to know, why the "n" word is so offensive, what is was like to live in the 50s, why being "helped" at in a department store(when no one else can find a clerk anywhere) can sometimes be irritating. Then you have situations like when I go to Sigs, a very upper class, monied town, and you are at the town beach and the conversation doesn't go beyond, "so, do you live in town?"  I don't know how many times that has been the conversation stopper, because the whole reason for the conversation was whether or not the propery values were about to crash.  I get very tired sometimes with the questions and comments  "wow, you do tan!" It gets tiring, it gets old. 

Well, I've never approached someone and just randomly asked them a question, but I don't doubt it happens.  The instances where I've been told "it's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" have been during regular conversations.  Once was a coworker saying that she couldn't work overtime that night because she was going to choir practice at her church.  I simply said "Oh, I didn't know you were in your church choir" and was told that "singing in church is a black thing, you wouldn't understand."  Here's my question, though, how can you be sure they were asking to see if their property values were going to crash?  I've asked (and been asked) if someone (I) lives in a particular area multiple times.  Sometimes that's where the conversation ends, sometimes it's not.  Why can't someone asking a question like that simply be them wanting to know if you live near them or not?  Why must there always be an ulterior motive?

The way I see it, it's a catch-22.  On one hand, if questions are asked, it's for some ulterior motive...on the other hand, if they're not asked, it's seen as indifference.  Either way, as a white person, I'm the "bad guy".....

ditto

Of course you must understand, too, that sometimes when approached by whites who "just want to understand" can get very tiring when they start asking you questions about gangs because they assume you must know about them.  I know as much about gangs as any of my white neighbors, but for some reason they think I must have the inside track.  They don't want to know, why the "n" word is so offensive, what is was like to live in the 50s, why being "helped" at in a department store(when no one else can find a clerk anywhere) can sometimes be irritating. Then you have situations like when I go to Sigs, a very upper class, monied town, and you are at the town beach and the conversation doesn't go beyond, "so, do you live in town?"  I don't know how many times that has been the conversation stopper, because the whole reason for the conversation was whether or not the propery values were about to crash.  I get very tired sometimes with the questions and comments  "wow, you do tan!" It gets tiring, it gets old. 

So it's more like, "It's a black thing, if you're too dumb to figure it out on your own, you wouldn't understand even if I explained it to you!"
??? ;)


Heh heh... That reminds me a few years back at Penn State, they had this big "GAD" promotion.. Gay Awareness Days.  Banners and everythang

So an enterprising group of students decided to also have an official "B.A.D." promotion for "Beastiality Awareness Days".  There was a huge outcry but in the end the campus authorities could not stop it, as it was, indeed a "diversity event".   ;D

I would have just assumed they were sincere, and left my dog at home!
(Oh, just 'cos I'm a beastie you assume I'm interested in your dog!)
:D
Well, one time on V-Day (google that), the guys from the Republican Club marched through campus with a giant phallus.  I thought, "Irony is lost on you people!"


Yeah, it happens.  Hey, I once had a guy who saw a picture of gay parade and was surprised that he saw African Americans in it.  He said "I didn't think you people had that problem, too."  ::)

Oh awchie!

Well, I've never approached someone and just randomly asked them a question, but I don't doubt it happens.  The instances where I've been told "it's a black thing, you wouldn't understand" have been during regular conversations.  Once was a coworker saying that she couldn't work overtime that night because she was going to choir practice at her church.  I simply said "Oh, I didn't know you were in your church choir" and was told that "singing in church is a black thing, you wouldn't understand."  Here's my question, though, how can you be sure they were asking to see if their property values were going to crash?  I've asked (and been asked) if someone (I) lives in a particular area multiple times.  Sometimes that's where the conversation ends, sometimes it's not.  Why can't someone asking a question like that simply be them wanting to know if you live near them or not?  Why must there always be an ulterior motive?

The way I see it, it's a catch-22.  On one hand, if questions are asked, it's for some ulterior motive...on the other hand, if they're not asked, it's seen as indifference.  Either way, as a white person, I'm the "bad guy".....


Seven out of ten times, sadly, there is an ulterior motive. You would just be the person from the other three that's simply asking a question. After a while, you can seriously decode why someone asked you a particular question. No, you're not the bad guy at all. But, I can tell you, there's a lot more that's making it hard for you.

  Here's my question, though, how can you be sure they were asking to see if their property values were going to crash?  I've asked (and been asked) if someone (I) lives in a particular area multiple times.  Sometimes that's where the conversation ends, sometimes it's not.  Why can't someone asking a question like that simply be them wanting to know if you live near them or not?  Why must there always be an ulterior motive?

The way I see it, it's a catch-22.  On one hand, if questions are asked, it's for some ulterior motive...on the other hand, if they're not asked, it's seen as indifference.  Either way, as a white person, I'm the "bad guy".....


When you are sitting on a blanket at the town beach, and a person on a nearby blanket comes over, says hello, and you think they are being friendly, and they ask if you live here, you say no, and they turn around with out so much as a "nice talking to you" or "see you later" go back to there blanket you have to wonder.  It has happened that way more than once.
You would have to be aquainted with the area, too.  Stepford on steroids.  There aren't any, I will repeat, any people of color.  I actually did have a conversation once with a woman(at the town beach) who had adopted two children, one of Spanish descent, and one African American.  They had been in the two 6 months, but decided that they wouldn't stay because they felt the atmosphere unwelcoming and thought the children would be better somewhere else.  Confirmation is a wonderful thing.

When you are sitting on a blanket at the town beach, and a person on a nearby blanket comes over, says hello, and you think they are being friendly, and they ask if you live here, you say no, and they turn around with out so much as a "nice talking to you" or "see you later" go back to there blanket you have to wonder.  It has happened that way more than once.
You would have to be aquainted with the area, too.  Stepford on steroids.  There aren't any, I will repeat, any people of color.  I actually did have a conversation once with a woman(at the town beach) who had adopted two children, one of Spanish descent, and one African American.  They had been in the two 6 months, but decided that they wouldn't stay because they felt the atmosphere unwelcoming and thought the children would be better somewhere else.  Confirmation is a wonderful thing.

It's like those snotty little towns on Long Island.  The courts said they couldn't have private public beaches, but they could certainly have private parking lots.  So that's what they did.  You can't park anywhere near the beaches without the proper residential permits...in fact, you're hard-pressed to find any "public" parking in the entire town.

Gotta keep the riff-raff out.  In this case, the riff-raff being anybody earning under $200 grand a year!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/06/jinnwink.gif

(Incidentally, this is what libertarian liberty looks like!)

It's like those snotty little towns on Long Island.  The courts said they couldn't have private public beaches, but they could certainly have private parking lots.  So that's what they did.  You can't park anywhere near the beaches without the proper residential permits...in fact, you're hard-pressed to find any "public" parking in the entire town.

Gotta keep the riff-raff out.  In this case, the riff-raff being anybody earning under $200 grand a year!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/06/jinnwink.gif

(Incidentally, this is what libertarian liberty looks like!)


I swear Newport Beach is the same way. It's hard as hell to get parking right near the beach.

It's like those snotty little towns on Long Island.  The courts said they couldn't have private public beaches, but they could certainly have private parking lots.  So that's what they did.  You can't park anywhere near the beaches without the proper residential permits...in fact, you're hard-pressed to find any "public" parking in the entire town.

Gotta keep the riff-raff out.  In this case, the riff-raff being anybody earning under $200 grand a year!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/06/jinnwink.gif

(Incidentally, this is what libertarian liberty looks like!)


There is a beach in Beverly, Beverly Farms section I think, that is private for residents of Beverly Farms residents only.  The other residents of Beverly can't use it, not even as walk ons.  It is their own private ocean, the servants must go elsewhere.

When you are sitting on a blanket at the town beach, and a person on a nearby blanket comes over, says hello, and you think they are being friendly, and they ask if you live here, you say no, and they turn around with out so much as a "nice talking to you" or "see you later" go back to there blanket you have to wonder.  It has happened that way more than once.
You would have to be aquainted with the area, too.  Stepford on steroids.  There aren't any, I will repeat, any people of color.  I actually did have a conversation once with a woman(at the town beach) who had adopted two children, one of Spanish descent, and one African American.  They had been in the two 6 months, but decided that they wouldn't stay because they felt the atmosphere unwelcoming and thought the children would be better somewhere else.  Confirmation is a wonderful thing.


I kinda know what you mean.  Back in '93 I was walking down Maxwell Street in Chicago in the middle of the day, I was out for a walk and to get a hot dog.  (I was at an event at the University of Illinois-Circle and this was lunch break time).

Anyway I was wearing a suit, and as I walked down the street, window shopping, and went into the hot dog shop to get a Vienna Sausage sandwich, people were staring at me and more than one said "Man what are YOU doin' out here."  Hey I belonged there like anybody else and I got my walk and I got my sandwich.  You'd think they never saw a white guy in a suit before.

Seven out of ten times, sadly, there is an ulterior motive. You would just be the person from the other three that's simply asking a question. After a while, you can seriously decode why someone asked you a particular question. No, you're not the bad guy at all. But, I can tell you, there's a lot more that's making it hard for you.


Perhaps if you couldn't go to MTV, VH1, and the like and see gangs, portrayals of women as nothing more than pieces of meat to be used, guns, violence and all that other crap glorified (in the name of culture) by certain races, then maybe, just maybe, the questions with "ulterior motive" would be eliminated??

It makes it kind of hard NOT to draw assumptions or conclusions when the only exposure you have to a differing lifestyle/culture is thrust upon you and then no explanation given except for "you're white and wouldn't understand"....

I kinda know what you mean.  Back in '93 I was walking down Maxwell Street in Chicago in the middle of the day, I was out for a walk and to get a hot dog.  (I was at an event at the University of Illinois-Circle and this was lunch break time).

Anyway I was wearing a suit, and as I walked down the street, window shopping, and went into the hot dog shop to get a Vienna Sausage sandwich, people were staring at me and more than one said "Man what are YOU doin' out here."  Hey I belonged there like anybody else and I got my walk and I got my sandwich.  You'd think they never saw a white guy in a suit before.


Yeah, white people + South Side of Chicago = WTF ;D

Actually, you weren't even that far south, which is kinda weird that you got that reaction.  Now, you go past 60th St or so and then that kind of thing becomes more commonplace.  Typically I never step foot outside the car if I have to go west of Cottage Grove.

I also remember the "It's a caucasian thing, you wouldn't comprehend" t-shirts.  They didn't get banned at UMass though.  I think it was just a couple of guys from the Republican Club wearing them, and those clowns went out of their way to make themselves despicable.  I don't mean because they were espousing minority political opinions on campus, but because they did it in the manner of David Spade!


I actually wanted to have one of those shirts, but could not find one.  But you have to remember, I love things that poke fun on current culture, purely as an item of satire.

Years ago, I also had a T-shirt furing the height of the "No Fear" craze.  It had the famous self-portret of Vincent Van Gogh, and below it said "No Ear".  I also had a shirt that said "The boat sank, get over it" during the height of the Titanic craze.  And yes, back in the 1980's I had a baseball hat with a big "O" on it (during the Malcolm X craze.

And my wearing of these items had nothing to do with a thing, other then my love of giving "pop craze" fads a gentle poke in the eye, much in the manner of MadTV, SNL and In Living Colour.


I swear Newport Beach is the same way. It's hard as hell to get parking right near the beach.


I know exactly what you mean there.  When I was stationed in Seal Beach, it was easier to walk into town (1.5 miles) then it was to drive into town.  Parking was almost impossible to find, and that was 25 years ago.  It is even worse in places like Venice and Santa Monica.


Yeah, white people + South Side of Chicago = WTF ;D


How about white people in Compton, Watts, and Inglewood?  I have lived in all three communities.  In LA, we thought little of it, but when I moved away, people would be like "You lived where?"

When you are sitting on a blanket at the town beach, and a person on a nearby blanket comes over, says hello, and you think they are being friendly, and they ask if you live here, you say no, and they turn around with out so much as a "nice talking to you" or "see you later" go back to there blanket you have to wonder.  It has happened that way more than once.
You would have to be aquainted with the area, too.  Stepford on steroids.  There aren't any, I will repeat, any people of color.  I actually did have a conversation once with a woman(at the town beach) who had adopted two children, one of Spanish descent, and one African American.  They had been in the two 6 months, but decided that they wouldn't stay because they felt the atmosphere unwelcoming and thought the children would be better somewhere else.  Confirmation is a wonderful thing.
You know what, though, I've gotten the same reaction in predominately black/hispanic sections of towns too.  I've had a few people, when they found out where I grew up, say "But, you're not Mexican." ???  I've also gone to parties where I'm the ONLY white person and the ONLY person who talked to me was the person I went with.  Of course, there were plenty of "what's she doing here?" being said about me.  It's sad, but there are groups of every race that don't want "outsiders" coming in....

I actually wanted to have one of those shirts, but could not find one.  But you have to remember, I love things that poke fun on current culture, purely as an item of satire.

Years ago, I also had a T-shirt furing the height of the "No Fear" craze.  It had the famous self-portret of Vincent Van Gogh, and below it said "No Ear".  I also had a shirt that said "The boat sank, get over it" during the height of the Titanic craze.  And yes, back in the 1980's I had a baseball hat with a big "O" on it (during the Malcolm X craze.

For Nancy Reagan--
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/41/002_3478~Just-Say-Moe-Posters.jpg

I actually wanted to have one of those shirts, but could not find one.  But you have to remember, I love things that poke fun on current culture, purely as an item of satire.

Years ago, I also had a T-shirt furing the height of the "No Fear" craze.  It had the famous self-portret of Vincent Van Gogh, and below it said "No Ear".  I also had a shirt that said "The boat sank, get over it" during the height of the Titanic craze.  And yes, back in the 1980's I had a baseball hat with a big "O" on it (during the Malcolm X craze.



  Dude, you never had one of these..?

  I had it on a ballcap that I wore at work in the mid 90s.  It got some laughs and quite a few "WTF?!"s...

  http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2006-6/1193336/STRASH~White-Trash-Posters.jpg

 

   Dude, you never had one of these..?

   I had it on a ballcap that I wore at work in the mid 90s.  It got some laughs and quite a few "WTF?!"s...

   http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2006-6/1193336/STRASH~White-Trash-Posters.jpg

   


LOL!!!

No, but if I had seen it, I would have bought it.

Another one of my old shirts dates back to the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics.  That is the one that the Soviet Union boycotted.

It showed the 5 Olympic rings, but one of them was off to the side, not connected to the other 4.  The captain below said "Let the Russians play with themselves".  It was actually quite risque` for 1984.

You know what, though, I've gotten the same reaction in predominately black/hispanic sections of towns too.  I've had a few people, when they found out where I grew up, say "But, you're not Mexican." ???  I've also gone to parties where I'm the ONLY white person and the ONLY person who talked to me was the person I went with.  Of course, there were plenty of "what's she doing here?" being said about me.  It's sad, but there are groups of every race that don't want "outsiders" coming in....




It might also lie in the way you act in such a situation though.  People of any color warm up to me fairly quickly because I'm comfortable in any situation (except, of course, when I'm on the South Side of Chicago where I will most likely get stabbed if I look at someone wrong ;D ;D)

Then again, a lot of people have some subconscious xenophobia so whatcha gonna do...

Perhaps if you couldn't go to MTV, VH1, and the like and see gangs, portrayals of women as nothing more than pieces of meat to be used, guns, violence and all that other crap glorified (in the name of culture) by certain races, then maybe, just maybe, the questions with "ulterior motive" would be eliminated??

It makes it kind of hard NOT to draw assumptions or conclusions when the only exposure you have to a differing lifestyle/culture is thrust upon you and then no explanation given except for "you're white and wouldn't understand"....


What bullsheesh world do you live in? Prior to the creation of these stations, the questions/stereotypes were still there. Give me a break. The only ones glorifying it are those that profit from it (e.g. record companies, performers) and those foolish enough to follow. To say that an entire group glorifies something is just lazy. I guess white women glorify the "Girls Gone Wild" tapes as well.

If the only exposure you have to a certain group is on t.v., whose fault is other than yours, particularly when you have the capacity to do otherwise? People have been known to get out of their homes and "see the world", you know. There aren't any believable excuses. I could use the lazy excuse of saying all I could've known about whites was laid out on the boob tube. But I can't since I ventured out, met people, and saw them as individuals.

What balony world do you live in? Prior to the creation of these stations, the questions/stereotypes were still there. Give me a break. The only ones glorifying it are those that profit from it (e.g. record companies, performers) and those foolish enough to follow. To say that an entire group glorifies something is just lazy. I guess white women glorify the "Girls Gone Wild" tapes as well.

If the only exposure you have to a certain group is on t.v., whose fault is other than yours, particularly when you have the capacity to do otherwise? People have been known to get out of their homes and "see the world", you know. There aren't any believable excuses. I could use the lazy excuse of saying all I could've known about whites was laid out on the boob tube. But I can't since I ventured out, met people, and saw them as individuals.


You beat me to it, Tanya. 
Perhaps if you couldn't go to MTV, VH1, and the like and see gangs, portrayals of women as nothing more than pieces of meat to be used, guns, violence and all that other crap glorified (in the name of culture) by certain races, then maybe, just maybe, the questions with "ulterior motive" would be eliminated??

It makes it kind of hard NOT to draw assumptions or conclusions when the only exposure you have to a differing lifestyle/culture is thrust upon you and then no explanation given except for "you're white and wouldn't understand"....
 

What is with you that you form your opinions about anything from MTV? 

You beat me to it, Tanya.   

What is with you that you form your opinions about anything from MTV? 


But when YOU speak up against it, it's because you're the PC police and have no sense of humor!

Only Angry White Conservatives are allowed to be soldiers in the "Culture War"!
:D

What balony world do you live in? Prior to the creation of these stations, the questions/stereotypes were still there. Give me a break. The only ones glorifying it are those that profit from it (e.g. record companies, performers) and those foolish enough to follow. To say that an entire group glorifies something is just lazy. I guess white women glorify the "Girls Gone Wild" tapes as well.

If the only exposure you have to a certain group is on t.v., whose fault is other than yours, particularly when you have the capacity to do otherwise? People have been known to get out of their homes and "see the world", you know. There aren't any believable excuses. I could use the lazy excuse of saying all I could've known about whites was laid out on the boob tube. But I can't since I ventured out, met people, and saw them as individuals.


Sister, let me tell you something.  I saw the world, probably before you were born, have been to 12 European countries and have traveled extensively up and down the east coast, California 3 different times, etc., etc.  I've had the opportunity to travel and interact with all sorts of people in my life and while in the Marines, lived and fought side by side with what we called the Dark green Marines(we were the light green Marines as there is no color bias in the Corps)

Now, I live in upstate NY, and guess what??  There aren't many people "of color" up this way.  Why is that important?  Because while I have had the opportunity to travel the world, many people up this way and in many many other small towns across America have not, so what exactly do you suppose THEIR exposure to people of color is, eh??  Maybe MTV and like stations??  Before you go getting off on your high horse about MTV and such and forming an opinion, maybe you should reflect on where a lot of this country lives, and it's not a couple blocks away from the city, the inner city, etc.

How many people "of color" do you suppose live in Maine, or Idaho, or Montana??  Where would you like them to get their info so they can form an opinion anyway??  Take a fact finding junket to the big city and get the real deal??  How many can afford to do that anyway??  Don't start your "how dare you" crap with me.  If I decided to start my WET tv as a response to BET I'd have the entire minority population at my door with a couple of more famous idiots leading the charge about how I was biased, etc.  Give me a break.

Maybe the next time somebody asks the question, if they got something more than a smart assed "you wouldn't understand, it's a black thing" answer then perceptions would change, but change starts with yourself, and that is something sorely lacking in many attitudes today...

BTW..I want to thank both you and Danoota for your comments, it sort of solidifies some of the other commentary on this thread.  Instead of taking somebody with a not entirely accurate opinion, rather than explain where info could be found and trying to make a person understand, you took the high road, ala Jessie and Al in the same manner as Duke Rape Case, Tawana Brawley etc...

Yeah, white people + South Side of Chicago = WTF ;D

Actually, you weren't even that far south, which is kinda weird that you got that reaction.  Now, you go past 60th St or so and then that kind of thing becomes more commonplace.  Typically I never step foot outside the car if I have to go west of Cottage Grove.


Yeah, I also used to get the same deal on Stony Island, down by Farrakhan's place.  Just down the street about a block on the other side of Stony Island there is the Moo and Oink grocery store.  Any time I would go into Chicago, on the way back I would stop off at ther Moo and Oink to pick up a gallon of milk because the price was so cheap.  Again, all I got was the "what you doin here mofo" looks.

I figured, tough crap.  I'm gonna shop here to get my groceries.  If they didn't like it I didn't care.  :-\\

I sorta got the same thing while I was working in the Salinas area..."Oh, es un chino!!!"  :D

Then they got used to me and all was well.

^
^
But it works both ways, doesn't it?  There are plenty of places where Blacks and Latinos get the ole "whatchoo doin' 'round these parts, boy?" treatment.

^
^
But it works both ways, doesn't it?  There are plenty of places where Blacks and Latinos get the ole "whatchoo doin' 'round these parts, boy?" treatment.


Yup.

Here in St. Louis, a lot of the affluent neighborhoods in West County agreed to have metrolink stations built, but they have refused to allow the tracks connected up to East St. Louis or downtown because "We don't want them black fellers comin' and theivin'"

Of course, the funny thing about this.. is that west county is the meth capital of the U.S and for all the paranoia in the world, nobody is stupid enough to travel 30 miles to steal a TV and then take it back to their house on a train.. with cameras on it.  ;D

Sister, let me tell you something.  I saw the world, probably before you were born, have been to 12 European countries and have traveled extensively up and down the east coast, California 3 different times, etc., etc.  I've had the opportunity to travel and interact with all sorts of people in my life and while in the Marines, lived and fought side by side with what we called the Dark green Marines(we were the light green Marines as there is no color bias in the Corps)

Now, I live in upstate NY, and guess what??  There aren't many people "of color" up this way.  Why is that important?  Because while I have had the opportunity to travel the world, many people up this way and in many many other small towns across America have not, so what exactly do you suppose THEIR exposure to people of color is, eh??  Maybe MTV and like stations??  Before you go getting off on your high horse about MTV and such and forming an opinion, maybe you should reflect on where a lot of this country lives, and it's not a couple blocks away from the city, the inner city, etc.

How many people "of color" do you suppose live in Maine, or Idaho, or Montana??  Where would you like them to get their info so they can form an opinion anyway??  Take a fact finding junket to the big city and get the real deal??  How many can afford to do that anyway??  Don't start your "how dare you" crap with me.  If I decided to start my WET tv as a response to BET I'd have the entire minority population at my door with a couple of more famous idiots leading the charge about how I was biased, etc.  Give me a break.

Maybe the next time somebody asks the question, if they got something more than a smart assed "you wouldn't understand, it's a black thing" answer then perceptions would change, but change starts with yourself, and that is something sorely lacking in many attitudes today...

BTW..I want to thank both you and Danoota for your comments, it sort of solidifies some of the other commentary on this thread.  Instead of taking somebody with a not entirely accurate opinion, rather than explain where info could be found and trying to make a person understand, you took the high road, ala Jessie and Al in the same manner as Duke Rape Case, Tawana Brawley etc...


Hahaha, brother, let me tell you somehing. I'm the daughter of a retired Marine (thus, I've traveled extensively). I've backpacked through Europe, taught in South Korea and South Africa, traveled to Australia, and ventured through South America. In addition, I've been through Canada, lived on both coasts (East and West) and lived in the South. So as Johnny Cash puts it, I've been everywhere, man!

You know what you're right. I wouldn't call the aforementioned states the melting pot of the country, but I would tell ya that maybe it's their fault for not being so diversity-friendly. Hell, I have white gay friends in these states that can get a break. But if you are honestly pissed over the "It's a Black thing, you wouldn't understand", which I haven't heard uttered since the early 90s, then I can give you a few phrases and words I've heard uttered in my lifetime to depict feelings towards me. Let me tell you, "It's a Black Thing..." would be considered a day at Disneyland.

Oh, by the way, while I've missed them, I haven't seen my twenties in a while and to some twenty-somethings, I'm considered old. But thanks for trying to focus on my "youth". Oh, and I don't mind being called a smart-ass (indirectly) b/c well, I am. Working on my Ph.D. as solidified my feelings!!

Yup.

Here in St. Louis, a lot of the affluent neighborhoods in West County agreed to have metrolink stations built, but they have refused to allow the tracks connected up to East St. Louis or downtown because "We don't want them black fellers comin' and theivin'"

Of course, the funny thing about this.. is that west county is the meth capital of the U.S and for all the paranoia in the world, nobody is stupid enough to travel 30 miles to steal a TV and then take it back to their house on a train.. with cameras on it.  ;D

When my parents were first married and living down in Scituate (Southshore, Boston) the townfolk were fighting against extension of trolley service down there.  "We don't want those n***ers paying a quarter and coming to our town!"
They might think the N word today, but they wouldn't dare say it.  Not so in 1962!  Ah, Boston, progressive, tolerant Boston!
:D

^
^
As for travelling, I've met worldly people who never left home, and ignorant hicks who toured  four continents.  It's not where you go, it's the mind you bring with you!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/znaika.gif

^
^
As for travelling, I've met worldly people who never left home, and ignorant hicks who toured  four continents.  It's not where you go, it's the mind you bring with you!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/znaika.gif


Why, thank you, Max!

You know what you're right. I wouldn't call the aforementioned states the melting pot of the country, but I would tell ya that maybe it's their fault for not being so diversity-friendly. Hell, I have white gay friends in these states that can get a break.



Wouldn't it be kind of weird for, say, Bangor, Maine, to suddenly put up big billboards and internet ads that say "Yo, black folk, come here!"?

???

You know what you're right. I wouldn't call the aforementioned states the melting pot of the country, but I would tell ya that maybe it's their fault for not being so diversity-friendly.


Be careful there, because things like that really do take two sides.

I lived for many years in Boise Idaho, and we actually had 4 black kids in my school.  And ya wanna know something?  They were among the most popular kids in school.

One big reason why you see so few minorities in "rural America" is simply because there is little or no reason to move there.  If there was, it would not be "rural", but "big city".  I know that if it was not for the fact that my mom was from Boise, we never would have moved there.

As a general rule of thumb, minorities tend to congregate together.  And no, this is not a stereotype, simply a fact.  And it is something as old as time.  Jews in Europe have congregated into ghettos for over a millenium.  During the 1960's and 70's, gays congregated to Greenwich Villiage and San Francisco.  In LA, Vietnamese congregated to Garden Grove while Koreans congregated to Wilshire.  Puerto Ricans tend to congregate to New York, while Cubans tend to congregate in Miami.  It is simply a desire to "live among your own kind", and it is a natural human reaction.

Of course, for various reasons people do often break that.  Sometimes it is because of work, or love, or simply to see something new.  A friend of my parents who was black moved to Boise because it ofered some of the best skiing in the North West USA (yes, there are blacks that ski).

I do not see it as an issue of being "minority unfriendly", as much as "why would anybody move there?"  Unlike big towns, small towns tend to be fairly static, and if anything more people leave them then enter.

After all, can anybody tell me why they would move to a place like Burns, Oregon?  Population of 3.064, and the major industry in the area is cattle and agriculture.  The vast majority of people who live there are probably 4th or 5th generation.

Wouldn't it be kind of weird for, say, Bangor, Maine, to suddenly put up big billboards and internet ads that say "Yo, black folk, come here!"?

???


Could be just the thing! Sort of an exchange program.  Like, Bangor gets G. Money Jackson, the South Central street hustler, and Watts gets Armand Michaud, laid-off paper mill worker from Bangor!

Diversity!  Multiculturism!
:P

I think it's more appropriate to ask what is the link between race and economic class. Petty crime is not committed by people who are financially secure, and the rate of violent crime in this class of citizens is dramatically low as well. Non-whites generally seem to be in more dire economical straits than their Caucasian compatriots in any Occidental country, and crime rates are higher within those cultural groups and also notably among poor Whites.

I think it's more appropriate to ask what is the link between race and economic class. Petty crime is not committed by people who are financially secure, and the rate of violent crime in this class of citizens is dramatically low as well. Non-whites generally seem to be in more dire economical straits than their Caucasian compatriots in any Occidental country, and crime rates are higher within those cultural groups and also notably among poor Whites.

While that may have been true before, its clearly the case that petty crimes, and to a lesser extent, violent crime are just as prevalent (and on the rise) in financially secure groups as well.

Here in California, there has been an obvious rise in theft, gang activity and violence in the Asian community. Were talking well educated, and financially secure third of fourth generation Asian youth with more $$ than interest in their standing in the community doing some pretty terrible things.

I'm also reminded of how many times I've been told by some of my friends and acquaintances of some of the awful things (petty, criminal or otherwise) they did and have gotten away without any notice or consequence. These are persons that are not in a minority group, and often getting somewhat of a kick out of knowing they are not expected to participate in such criminal activity considering their economic status and background.

I've always been irked by this as I've always felt that I've received that extra bit of attention regarding my activities, whilst the "respected upstanding" citzens of lighter color have been getting away with just the things I have been suspected of doing...Maybe it has to do with your/our parents (or if they were around) and how you were raised, but I've been poor and I've known dirt poor people, but we didn't get involved with crime due to our financial status or rationalizing its OK because I'm poor and black.
So, I'm not so quick to give so much credence to economic class as the prevailing factor in crime. At least not for every case.

While that may have been true before, its clearly the case that petty crimes, and to a lesser extent, violent crime are just as prevalent (and on the rise) in financially secure groups as well.

Here in California, there has been an obvious rise in theft, gang activity and violence in the Asian community. Were talking well educated, and financially secure third of fourth generation Asian youth with more $$ than interest in their standing in the community doing some pretty terrible things.


This is not a widespread phenomenon. There is something driving those kids to commit violent crime, and it sure ain't their race. I can tell you that right now.

I think it's more appropriate to ask what is the link between race and economic class. Petty crime is not committed by people who are financially secure, and the rate of violent crime in this class of citizens is dramatically low as well. Non-whites generally seem to be in more dire economical straits than their Caucasian compatriots in any Occidental country, and crime rates are higher within those cultural groups and also notably among poor Whites.


I seem to remember Winona Ryder a few years ago being arrested for shoplifting.  And Leona Helmsley was also arrested for shoplifting.  Other rich and famous people have been arrested for everything from assault and theft to rape and murder.  Just look at William Kennedy Smith.

People have to learn to dissassociate "Crime" from "Social Class" (or "Income").  Some people are simply pathalogically prone to comit crimes, be it rape, murder, assault, or theft.  And they come from all areas of the social ladder, from wealthy socialites to ghetto kids.  Some people start with everything handed to them and descend into degradation, while some start with nothing and are able to reach the stars.

This is not a widespread phenomenon. There is something driving those kids to commit violent crime, and it sure ain't their race. I can tell you that right now.


I do follow your rational here, but you have to understand that in poor areas all over the country there is a real sense of community and hard work, but in so many of these predominantly black areas this ethic seems to be missing, replaced with a commitment to crime. It's not so much "Poverty is driving them to do it" but more "poverty is eroding the family and community" and it seems to me that the family and the community were weaker in these areas to begin with, I think that's the issue that needs addressing.

For instance, in New Orleans, obviously the white areas have been rebuilt, the money was there to do it, but so have the Vietnamese communities, so have the Laotian and Mexican communities, yet so many of the black communities still lay in ruins, now, you can not sit there and tell me that so many first generation Vietnamese immigrants have a vast amount more money at their disposal than a black community that has been in the area for ten times as long. It's the lack of community and eroded work ethic that seem to be the issue here.

For instance, in New Orleans, obviously the white areas have been rebuilt, the money was there to do it, but so have the Vietnamese communities, so have the Laotian and Mexican communities, yet so many of the black communities still lay in ruins, now, you can not sit there and tell me that so many first generation Vietnamese immigrants have a vast amount more money at their disposal than a black community that has been in the area for ten times as long. It's the lack of community and eroded work ethic that seem to be the issue here.


I tend to also lay the blame for things like this for "Victimitus".  Much like housing projects, a lot of people in the black community likes to portray itself as victims.  And this does the community a great disservice, because it teaches people that they are unable to achieve something on their own.

One of the things that shocked me was the refusal of people to leave NO before Katrina hit.  And if you want to see an even bigger disaster, wait a while longer.  Historically, New York City is long overdue for a major hurricane.  I bet that NY will suffer the same fate as NO, with hundreds of thousands of people refusing to leave.  Because it is a region struck so rarely, they have little idea how bad they can really be.

Personally, I have no interest in waiting for the Government to take care of me.  However, a lot of people simply want to be taken care of.  And I saw the same thing in LA after the 1994 Earthquake.  Some people turned around and rebuilt their homes and businesses on their own, while others waited months or years for the Government to get around to take care of them.

To me, this was shown to be the case by the huge number of people saying "Nobody told us to leave".  That is pure insanity, not to mention victimization at it's worst.  If your house if burning down around you, do you wait for the fire department to show up and tell you to leave?  If you get in a car accident and smell leaking gasoline, do you wait for the Police to tell you to get out of the car?  In much the same way, when you hear a killer hurricane is heading towards where you live, do you wait for the Government to tell you to leave or give you transportation out?

Before Katrina took it's 90 degree West turn, I was right in the path of "Ground Zero".  I live approximately 50 miles north of Panama City Beach (where the news crews routinely camp out filming hurricane effects).  When Ivan came through, we had over 100 tornadoes touch down within 20 miles of where I live (one less then a half mile away from my home).  But I had already moved to a friend's house, with solid construction.  And if Katrina had come my way, I was fully prepared to leave town and head for the hills.  I have a "Disaster Kit" ready to go at all times, and can evacuate my home with only 10 minutes warning and survive for 2 weeks on my own.  I have everything in it from a tend and sleeping bag, to cooking supplies, first aid kit, change of clothes, medication, and almost a gallon of water carrying capacity.

And I certainly don't need the Government to tell me when it is time to get out of Dodge, I use my own judgement to do that.

I tend to also lay the blame for things like this for "Victimitus".  Much like housing projects, a lot of people in the black community likes to portray itself as victims.  And this does the community a great disservice, because it teaches people that they are unable to achieve something on their own.

One of the things that shocked me was the refusal of people to leave NO before Katrina hit.  And if you want to see an even bigger disaster, wait a while longer.  Historically, New York City is long overdue for a major hurricane.  I bet that NY will suffer the same fate as NO, with hundreds of thousands of people refusing to leave.  Because it is a region struck so rarely, they have little idea how bad they can really be.

Personally, I have no interest in waiting for the Government to take care of me.  However, a lot of people simply want to be taken care of.  And I saw the same thing in LA after the 1994 Earthquake.  Some people turned around and rebuilt their homes and businesses on their own, while others waited months or years for the Government to get around to take care of them.

To me, this was shown to be the case by the huge number of people saying "Nobody told us to leave".  That is pure insanity, not to mention victimization at it's worst.  If your house if burning down around you, do you wait for the fire department to show up and tell you to leave?  If you get in a car accident and smell leaking gasoline, do you wait for the Police to tell you to get out of the car?  In much the same way, when you hear a killer hurricane is heading towards where you live, do you wait for the Government to tell you to leave or give you transportation out?

Before Katrina took it's 90 degree West turn, I was right in the path of "Ground Zero".  I live approximately 50 miles north of Panama City Beach (where the news crews routinely camp out filming hurricane effects).  When Ivan came through, we had over 100 tornadoes touch down within 20 miles of where I live (one less then a half mile away from my home).  But I had already moved to a friend's house, with solid construction.  And if Katrina had come my way, I was fully prepared to leave town and head for the hills.  I have a "Disaster Kit" ready to go at all times, and can evacuate my home with only 10 minutes warning and survive for 2 weeks on my own.  I have everything in it from a tend and sleeping bag, to cooking supplies, first aid kit, change of clothes, medication, and almost a gallon of water carrying capacity.

And I certainly don't need the Government to tell me when it is time to get out of Dodge, I use my own judgement to do that.


Thank you.

Very accurate (and kudos for being smart enough to be prepared for anything like that - my housemates laugh at me because I actually wrote a list for 'When New Madrid kills us all'). I'm not going to wait for the Government to get around to me, when disaster comes knocking, it's time to roll up your sleeves and get on with it.

Very accurate (and kudos for being smart enough to be prepared for anything like that - my housemates laugh at me because I actually wrote a list for 'When New Madrid kills us all'). I'm not going to wait for the Government to get around to me, when disaster comes knocking, it's time to roll up your sleeves and get on with it.


The New Madrid Fault is something else I am very aware of.  Having lived in California for most of my life, I am accustomed to disasters that strike with no warning.  And I am fully prepared to take care of myself.  Oh I will probably use Government help, but I will not rely on it.  That way people who are much worse off then I am can use it.  And when the New Madrid goes, I am well within the radius of serious damage.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Charleston1895.gif

Back in 1999, I had a lot of people come up and ask me if they should have a Y2K kit.  And I often got raised eyebrows when I told them "Yes".  Oh, I did not expect any of the apocalyptic events to happen that some people talked about.  But living in LA, everybody should have an earthquake kit, and that was basically the same thing as a Y2K kit.

When I lived in North Carolina, the military required everybody to have Hurricane kits who was married.  And all students who attended on-base school was required to have a smaller kit at the school.  I think that something like this should be required for everybody.  It would go a long ways to cutting the death rates during the event of a disaster, be it natural or man made.

I tend to also lay the blame for things like this for "Victimitus".  Much like housing projects, a lot of people in the black community likes to portray itself as victims.  And this does the community a great disservice, because it teaches people that they are unable to achieve something on their own.

One of the things that shocked me was the refusal of people to leave NO before Katrina hit.  And if you want to see an even bigger disaster, wait a while longer.  Historically, New York City is long overdue for a major hurricane.  I bet that NY will suffer the same fate as NO, with hundreds of thousands of people refusing to leave.  Because it is a region struck so rarely, they have little idea how bad they can really be.

Personally, I have no interest in waiting for the Government to take care of me.  However, a lot of people simply want to be taken care of.  And I saw the same thing in LA after the 1994 Earthquake.  Some people turned around and rebuilt their homes and businesses on their own, while others waited months or years for the Government to get around to take care of them.

To me, this was shown to be the case by the huge number of people saying "Nobody told us to leave".  That is pure insanity, not to mention victimization at it's worst.  If your house if burning down around you, do you wait for the fire department to show up and tell you to leave?  If you get in a car accident and smell leaking gasoline, do you wait for the Police to tell you to get out of the car?  In much the same way, when you hear a killer hurricane is heading towards where you live, do you wait for the Government to tell you to leave or give you transportation out?

Before Katrina took it's 90 degree West turn, I was right in the path of "Ground Zero".  I live approximately 50 miles north of Panama City Beach (where the news crews routinely camp out filming hurricane effects).  When Ivan came through, we had over 100 tornadoes touch down within 20 miles of where I live (one less then a half mile away from my home).  But I had already moved to a friend's house, with solid construction.  And if Katrina had come my way, I was fully prepared to leave town and head for the hills.  I have a "Disaster Kit" ready to go at all times, and can evacuate my home with only 10 minutes warning and survive for 2 weeks on my own.  I have everything in it from a tend and sleeping bag, to cooking supplies, first aid kit, change of clothes, medication, and almost a gallon of water carrying capacity.

And I certainly don't need the Government to tell me when it is time to get out of Dodge, I use my own judgement to do that.


As Davey said as well...thank you Mushroom for this post.

I was talking with a friend the other day about the big ice storms we get up this way and also the blizzards.  People up this way know that crap like this can occur, so they are prepared for it when it does happen. 

Seems like a lot of people sit around and choose to ignore warnings, or fail to prepare themselves in any way, waiting instead of the government to do it for them, and then because of their own laziness/ineptitude, play the "oh woe is me" card after the event and blame everybody except themselves

Nobody in their right mind (with the exception of the infirm/mentally handicapped/physically handicapped should have hesitated to get out of N.O., and the ones listed above should have received help from community services, neighbors, etc.  Anybody that sat around thinking they could have ridden Katrina out was pretty foolish.

Kudos to the communities down there that have rebuilt, and shame on the ones that haven't...

Far worse than any "victim" mentality the "black community" might have is the way conservatives blamed the impoverished people of New Orleans for their plight after Katrina.  More infuriating than Ray Nagin's incompetence was the Bush Adminstration's contempt.  And the worst part....having to listen to conservative whites, spurred on by the dittohead mentality, use the misfortune of others to bolster their own self-congratulation.  The prevailing delusion among this crowd boils down to: "I don't need the government's help so long as somebody out there needs the government's help more than me."  They do not realize how much they themselves rely on the government day in and day out because the right-wing spinmeisters played a psychological trick on them.  
>:(

I do follow your rational here, but you have to understand that in poor areas all over the country there is a real sense of community and hard work, but in so many of these predominantly black areas this ethic seems to be missing, replaced with a commitment to crime. It's not so much "Poverty is driving them to do it" but more "poverty is eroding the family and community" and it seems to me that the family and the community were weaker in these areas to begin with, I think that's the issue that needs addressing.



Whoa, slow down on the incorrect generalization. Don't judge the actions and thoughts of a few to just entire areas, especially when not qualified to make such generalizations.

As far as many of the communities being rebuilt, many of the "white communities" while hit, weren't hit as hard as the Ninth Ward. Quite frankly, the Mexican community didn't really rebuild itself. It took advantage of the "cheap labor instead of contracted work" opportunities down there since this group was largely unheard of down there (direct quote from my white grandmother who lives in Slidell, LA).

Sure, we would all love to be prepared for something that hits. But damn it, every now and then, Mother Nature hits us with something that's beyond our control. So, saying this and that about preparation is a Catch-22. Would you say the same for those in Texas who are dealing with the flooding? I mean, isn't it silly to live in trailer parks near rivers when rains could far exceed expectations and then cry for governmental help (oh yes, they are doing the same there as well - but I guess there's spin no matter the complexion)?

Whoa, slow down on the incorrect generalization. Don't judge the actions and thoughts of a few to just entire areas, especially when not qualified to make such generalizations.

As far as many of the communities being rebuilt, many of the "white communities" while hit, weren't hit as hard as the Ninth Ward. Quite frankly, the Mexican community didn't really rebuild itself. It took advantage of the "cheap labor instead of contracted work" opportunities down there since this group was largely unheard of down there (direct quote from my white grandmother who lives in Slidell, LA).

Sure, we would all love to be prepared for something that hits. But damn it, every now and then, Mother Nature hits us with something that's beyond our control. So, saying this and that about preparation is a Catch-22. Would you say the same for those in Texas who are dealing with the flooding? I mean, isn't it silly to live in trailer parks near rivers when rains could far exceed expectations and then cry for governmental help (oh yes, they are doing the same there as well - but I guess there's spin no matter the complexion)?


I'm not trying to put a spin on anything, just saying what I see.

.. and there's a difference between "Can we get some clean water here 2 days after the flooding." and "We've still not rebuilt our house 12+ months onwards."

I'm not trying to put a spin on anything, just saying what I see.

.. and there's a difference between "Can we get some clean water here 2 days after the flooding." and "We've still not rebuilt our house 12+ months onwards."


There is a big difference.

Too often, some segments of the population just sit there and do nothing.  Yes, not all of the communities were hit as hard as the 9th ward, but how much action has been taken by the residents of the 9th ward themselves, rather than waiting for the government to step in and assist?  Speaking of "assist", too many people do not look for assistance anymore, rather they've convoluted "assist" to mean, in their minds, complete doting by the government.

So the black community got hammered badly in Katrina, what has the black community done for themselves to rise up from this??  Maybe they did get the worst of the weather, but it's going on a couple years now and if they are still sitting around and complaining about what the government has or has not done for them without doing for themselves then it's hard for anybody with a spirit of self determination or drive within themselves to understand.

I've seen some pretty racially biased comments on here, particularly from people who are supposedly more tolerant than I.  The comment about >>"I wouldn't call the aforementioned states the melting pot of the country, but I would tell ya that maybe it's their fault for not being so diversity-friendly">>  Really??  How in the name of all thats Holy is it that particular state populations fault??  Sounds like a racial slam to me, blame it on somebody else rather than address the real issue.  Maybe we should force people of a non white color to move to these areas in order to promote racial harmony??  Maybe the government should forcibly pick these people up and relocate them to places like Montana, or as Rice mentioned..place big billboards up all over states without a large minority population.

This area got a relocated family here after Katrina.  The community opened up their wallets to this family and a car dealer even went so far as to give them a new car, not to mention housing was given(not loaned, given) and job offers were extended...you want to know how this family showed gratitude to the area ?  By clogging up the local court system when the man decided it was in his best interest to smother their 2 year old daughters life away.  Yes, thats one example out of countless thousands.  But why couldn't it have been a story of a good nature instead, why couldn't this family have taken advantage of their new life and made a go of things??

Why did the crime rate in Oklahoma City take a major jump when the Katrina refugees moved there??  Please don't start in about coincidence, it was well documented in the news about the Katrina refugees status in the crime reports and in the papers.

If what is posted here is true about all the other communities around New Orleans rebuilding and some areas being harder hit than others as an argument, then it should be a no brainer for that community in question to show how they can do for themselves, especially in the face of their adversity, unless they have no will or desire to do anything other than languish in their surroundings and beyotch to whomever will listen.

As far as being one of the white conservatives who is prepared for adversity...granted, one cannot prepare themselves for ANY situation, but they can prepare themselves for many circumstances rather than sit on their butts and wait for big brother to step in and save them.  The liberals seem to think that Americans should have NO independence from government and should not be able to think and act on our own..being a resourceful person is scorned in certain circles anymore, we're expected to be sheep and await with tears in our eyes and an outstretched hand awaiting salvation when something comes along to disrupt our lives, or just during the everyday course of our lives.

Now, I know that not everybody can afford something like a generator in the event of major infrastructure failure like a microburst, ice storm, etc.  However, I really don't see where a white conservative like myself should be scorned for having one, or by purchasing one large enough so that I can also hook up my very elderly neighbors house in such an event so that they may stay warm and have lighting as well.  If thats whats considered my self gratification or whatever BS manner it was phrased in another post, then I am completely guilty as charged and am damn proud of it.  For those of you out there that choose to sit around and wait, I pity you for the lack of spirit you have...for those of you who feel no shame in being prepared and taking matters into your own hands, you have my admiration...

I've seen some pretty racially biased comments on here, particularly from people who are supposedly more tolerant than I.  The comment about >>"I wouldn't call the aforementioned states the melting pot of the country, but I would tell ya that maybe it's their fault for not being so diversity-friendly">>  Really??  How in the name of all thats Holy is it that particular state populations fault??  Sounds like a racial slam to me, blame it on somebody else rather than address the real issue.  Maybe we should force people of a non white color to move to these areas in order to promote racial harmony??  Maybe the government should forcibly pick these people up and relocate them to places like Montana, or as Rice mentioned..place big billboards up all over states without a large minority population.


Just like anything else, I see no connection between race and people who act stupidly.  Sure you had a lot of blacks that stayed behind and tried to "ride things out", but you also had a lot of whites that did the exact same thing.  And contrary to what a lot of people liked to make it seem, it had nothing to do with poverty.  Fats Domino was one of those who thought he could ride out the storm, and he had to be rescued by the Coast Guard by helicopter.

And Barry Cowsil lost his life in the flooding.  He was not poor, and he was not black.  He simply had the foolish notion that he could stay at home and survive a Category 5 hurricane.  And this is hardly unique to NO.  I remember Harry Truman, an 84 year old man that refused all attempts to evacuate him from Spirit Lake, on the slopes of Mt. St. Helens.  He was probably the first to perish when the volcano blew up.


Far worse than any "victim" mentality the "black community" might have is the way conservatives blamed the impoverished people of New Orleans for their plight after Katrina.  More infuriating than Ray Nagin's incompetence was the Bush Adminstration's contempt.  And the worst part....having to listen to conservative whites, spurred on by the dittohead mentality, use the misfortune of others to bolster their own self-congratulation.  The prevailing delusion among this crowd boils down to: "I don't need the government's help so long as somebody out there needs the government's help more than me."  They do not realize how much they themselves rely on the government day in and day out because the right-wing spinmeisters played a psychological trick on them.  
>:(


Max, I blame stupid people for making stupid decisions.  There were a lot of rich people who choose to stay in NO, and a lot of poor people who used their common sense and got the hell out ahead of time.  People are strongly resistant to evacuation, this is a simple fact.  I remember people rushing back to their homes as Oakland burned around them in 1991.  This was one of the richest neighborhoods in Oakland, full of million dollar homes.  But over 20 people died because they thought they could either fight it themselves, or to try and save some of their belongings. 

There are disasters which give no warning, like hurricanes and tsunamis.  IN those cases, nobody can be blamed for not leaving an area, because there is simply no time.  The same for tornadoes, which give very little warning.  However, things like Hurricanes give a lot of warning.  And I certainly don't need to Government to tell me what to do if one is comming my way.  I do not want or need a "Big Brother" to hold my hand and wipe my nose for me.  And maybe that is a big part of the problem.  Some groups have become so dependent on "Big Brother" to take care of them, that their own survival instinct has left them.

Naw, I think I will still blame it on stupid people who make stupid decisions.  And whenever New York gets hit by a hurricane, watch the same thing happen.  Stupid people who decided to stay in place and ride the storm out.  And of course, the President, FEMA, and every Government agency will be blamed for the damage and death because of this.  Maybe we need a Government that will come in and force people out before the storm hits.  Mobilize the National Guard and have forced evacuations.  That way nobody will be in the path of the storm.

Well, I just give up. You must be right. Given that a rich, klepto actress was caught stealing and everything I guess I just have no other recourse than to toss up my hands and agree. The amount of crime one commits has a direct correlation to his race and only to his race, and seeing as how black people apparently commit the most crimes, mexicans the second most, then the asians, then the whites I suppose that means that whites are superior to asians who are superior to mexicans and so forth on down the line and the blacks are just the scum of the f**king earth then eh? Although I can't help but ask myself why this criminal hierarchy would be stratified in the exact order of the traditional racial hierarchy of wealth and success in the United States of America...

Look man, I'm sorry you got mugged for a couple pizzas and few dollars, but give me a break. Those guys who mugged you would not have gone through the trouble of kicking your @ss and stealing your money if they had money already. This isn't Clockwork Orange.

And you Thrashmister... I'm sorry, but to assert that the African-American community is committed to a life of crime. I find that inexcusable frankly. I have my own beef with the scum-ass thuggy rappers that many black youth have chosen as their role models (although of course, it's not just black youth who have done this, it appears in every race in ever nation), but don't write off all of the other hardworking black people who just want to live right and provide for their families. That, by the way, is the majority of black people in America.

Well, I just give up. You must be right. Given that a rich, klepto actress was caught stealing and everything I guess I just have no other recourse than to toss up my hands and agree. The amount of crime one commits has a direct correlation to his race and only to his race, and seeing as how black people apparently commit the most crimes, mexicans the second most, then the asians, then the whites I suppose that means that whites are superior to asians who are superior to mexicans and so forth on down the line and the blacks are just the scum of the f**king earth then eh? Although I can't help but ask myself why this criminal hierarchy would be stratified in the exact order of the traditional racial hierarchy of wealth and success in the United States of America...

Look man, I'm sorry you got mugged for a couple pizzas and few dollars, but give me a break. Those guys who mugged you would not have gone through the trouble of kicking your @ss and stealing your money if they had money already. This isn't Clockwork Orange.

And you Thrashmister... I'm sorry, but to assert that the African-American community is committed to a life of crime. I find that inexcusable frankly. I have my own beef with the scum-ass thuggy rappers that many black youth have chosen as their role models (although of course, it's not just black youth who have done this, it appears in every race in ever nation), but don't write off all of the other hardworking black people who just want to live right and provide for their families. That, by the way, is the majority of black people in America.


Good to hear from you, McD

As you must know, they said the exact same thing about the Irish.  I always tend to point to the Irish because the rhetoric used against them is the same, only now their descendants are using it against the African Americans.  There are people who will say, that the Irish changed their station in life, but all these half smarts do not want to acknowledge that in many so called societies there is a Machiavellian use of an underclass used to keep all the lower classes in what the upper classes choose to deem as "their place", throwing bones to let them think they are more like the uppers, while they, uppers, laugh all the way to the Country Club.  Just as the poor southern whites swallowed the Kool Aid of "fighting for states rights" when what they were actually fighting for the right of the wealthy to rape, barter, and kill,  so do many today swallow the Kool-Aid of "they could if they wanted, too. There isn't any discrimination here anymore"

I'm not trying to put a spin on anything, just saying what I see.

.. and there's a difference between "Can we get some clean water here 2 days after the flooding." and "We've still not rebuilt our house 12+ months onwards."


Then, I suggest a check on your vision b/c what you see is false. You are generalizing an entire community, especially when it's clear that you aren't completely knowledgeable of the group at hand.

Those that can have rebuilt (with the insurance they were able to recoup, which wasn't much) and those that couldn't still have problems, regardless of their race. Yes, the difference is that the government is stepping in quickly b/c of the Katrina aftermath, not despite it. They are covering their asses.

Excuse me, how is my statement racially-biased, Exeslayer? The truth is that those states aren't diverse at all and it's not just race. It's also non-diverse in sexual orientation and religion, other than Christianity and maybe Mormon, when discussing Utah. There's no bias. It's fact. These states have not been friendly to diversity of any kind. The fact that much of it is rural is a b.s. thought b/c farmers aren't only white. Do you believe these groups can only live in urban areas?

T

Excuse me, how is my statement racially-biased, Exeslayer? The truth is that those states aren't diverse at all and it's not just race. It's also non-diverse in sexual orientation and religion, other than Christianity and maybe Mormon, when discussing Utah. There's no bias. It's fact. These states have not been friendly to diversity of any kind. The fact that much of it is rural is a b.s. thought b/c farmers aren't only white. Do you believe these groups can only live in urban areas?


Well..If I'm to look at your comment about how "their not diversity friendly" and ask you who you were referring to, what would your answer be??  White people??  I would dare guess thats the case, because one of the states I mentioned in an earlier post was Montana, and as of the 2000 census, the black population was only 2,692, so I doubt you were referring to them.

If I , as a white male was in a conversation concerning people of color and dared to utter the phrase "their not (you fill in the blank)" I'd have people screaming for my head on a platter.  Thats fact as well.

Absolutely right, the fact it's rural has nothing to do with it.  I'm surprised more of "their" people don't move there.....

I do follow your rational here, but you have to understand that in poor areas all over the country there is a real sense of community and hard work, but in so many of these predominantly black areas this ethic seems to be missing, replaced with a commitment to crime. It's not so much "Poverty is driving them to do it" but more "poverty is eroding the family and community" and it seems to me that the family and the community were weaker in these areas to begin with, I think that's the issue that needs addressing.




Found on a Google search..

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2007/07/06/blackonblack/

Sort of nails the "family and community" issue you speak of...

Some people around here are stubborn thinkers.  I see rigid narratives etched in minds to keep fragile egos on the straight and narrow lest they start feeling frightened and vulnerable once again.
:(

OK, Messrs. You-Know-Who-You-Are:

"Stupid people?" Stupidity is relative, and you guys ain't exactly Einstein!

I could type 'till my fingers ran red explaining the shades of gray between black and white, and history, and economy, and psychology, and on and on and on but some people are just mule-stubborn.  What I read in the foregoing posts reveals a more about the posters than the subject of the posts.  Insecure people write themselves rigid narratives they cannot change lest it uncover something they don't want to see.
::)


I hear you. I'm tired of arguing to stone walls.


Well..If I'm to look at your comment about how "their not diversity friendly" and ask you who you were referring to, what would your answer be??  White people??  I would dare guess thats the case, because one of the states I mentioned in an earlier post was Montana, and as of the 2000 census, the black population was only 2,692, so I doubt you were referring to them.

If I , as a white male was in a conversation concerning people of color and dared to utter the phrase "their not (you fill in the blank)" I'd have people screaming for my head on a platter.  Thats fact as well.

Absolutely right, the fact it's rural has nothing to do with it.  I'm surprised more of "their" people don't move there.....


Any one of any race (including whites who don't live in these states) would tell you that those states are primarily white, so what are you going on about? Diversity doesn't just mean racial!!!!! Damn!!!! How many gays live there? BTW, I'll ask Matthew Shepard how welcomed he felt in the afterlife. How many people of the Jewish faith live there? Are you trying to make an issue out of something that isn't there. I'm not referring to whites as a whole in the world (is that what you are trying to make an issue of?). You have to admit that these states are the most homogenous of all the fifty states, and why is that?

Wow, 2,692! That's enough to fill one town in an entire state.

Perhaps I'm incredibly naive, but I fail to see where race has anything to do with crime. Or where socioeconomic status has anything to do with crime...

Crime, to me, is the result of people in society who decide to take the easy, cheap and lazy route to make their living. Barring the people who commit crime just for the hell of it (gang initiations, adolescents being bored, etc.), ISTM that when we start saying "so-and-so race commits more crime than xxx race", we're coming up with a rather convenient and flawed feel-good methodology to avoid the deeper problem and question: why do people commit crime? Race based arguments are old and tired to me: I don't want to hear them. Criminal intent is not an inherited gene, it's not nature, but all nurture, or, more appropriately I suppose, lack of nurture...

Society will always have crime, but, to me, the bigger crime is our not evaluating each crime, victim, or perpetrator on a case-by-case basis, rather we label them with nice and neat little stickers, like folders in our desk cabinets.

Ant

Well, I just give up. You must be right. Given that a rich, klepto actress was caught stealing and everything I guess I just have no other recourse than to toss up my hands and agree. The amount of crime one commits has a direct correlation to his race and only to his race, and seeing as how black people apparently commit the most crimes, mexicans the second most, then the asians, then the whites I suppose that means that whites are superior to asians who are superior to mexicans and so forth on down the line and the blacks are just the scum of the f**king earth then eh? Although I can't help but ask myself why this criminal hierarchy would be stratified in the exact order of the traditional racial hierarchy of wealth and success in the United States of America...

Look man, I'm sorry you got mugged for a couple pizzas and few dollars, but give me a break. Those guys who mugged you would not have gone through the trouble of kicking your @ss and stealing your money if they had money already. This isn't Clockwork Orange.


You obviously have not paid any attention to anything that I have said.  And I fully agree with you, there is really no realtionship to crime and race.  In fact, I refuse to connect the two of them, other then as a way to identify a criminal (or suspect).

"This is not Clockwork Orange"????  I am sorry, but you are out of touch.  There are a huge number of incidents of people who commit crimes for the simple thrill of it.  There was talk a few years ago about something called "Criminal Dependency", which can be a dark form of "Code 3 Fever".  Where people become addicted to tha "adrenaline high" of breaking the law, and do crimes to satisfy that urge.  This could explain things ranging from serial murder and kleptomaniacs to arsonists and serial bank robbers.

Just drive around LA or the slum area of any other medium to large city, and you will see incidents like "Clockwork Orange" all the time.  Youths that simply do not give a damn about anything but themselves, and will not hesitate to attack somebody else for a whim. 

Some people around here are stubborn thinkers.  I see rigid narratives etched in minds to keep fragile egos on the straight and narrow lest they start feeling frightened and vulnerable once again.
:(


http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-sheeshz/pot-kettle-black.jpg


Perhaps I'm incredibly naive, but I fail to see where race has anything to do with crime. Or where socioeconomic status has anything to do with crime...

Crime, to me, is the result of people in society who decide to take the easy, cheap and lazy route to make their living. Barring the people who commit crime just for the hell of it (gang initiations, adolescents being bored, etc.), ISTM that when we start saying "so-and-so race commits more crime than xxx race", we're coming up with a rather convenient and flawed feel-good methodology to avoid the deeper problem and question: why do people commit crime? Race based arguments are old and tired to me: I don't want to hear them. Criminal intent is not an inherited gene, it's not nature, but all nurture, or, more appropriately I suppose, lack of nurture...

Society will always have crime, but, to me, the bigger crime is our not evaluating each crime, victim, or perpetrator on a case-by-case basis, rather we label them with nice and neat little stickers, like folders in our desk cabinets.

Ant


I like what you say here.  It's disheartening to see people scapegoating something else for not just their own shortcomings and criminal activities, but for others as well.  Whether you are poor or rich, you always have a choice whether to commit the crime or not...

Of course you always have a choice in anything you do, including the choice to break the law; however, if you are a broke teenager with very few options in the world, you're a helluva lot more likely to turn to a life of crime than someone without these problems. All of the people I hung out with in high school did at least something with their lives instead of selling drugs and robbing liquor stores, but then again all of those people had hardworking parents who reared them right and who set a good example. Most of my friends are in university, though the ones who aren't certainly are not beating up pizza men. And while I suppose it was possible that one or more of these people would have committed violent crime simply for the thrill of it, it was and is quite unlikely. It's not commonplace whatsoever to see middle-class kids committing Clockwork Orang style ultra-violence. If it were, we'd be seeing a lot more beat up pizza men.

Perhaps I'm incredibly naive, but I fail to see where race has anything to do with crime. Or where socioeconomic status has anything to do with crime...

Crime, to me, is the result of people in society who decide to take the easy, cheap and lazy route to make their living. Barring the people who commit crime just for the hell of it (gang initiations, adolescents being bored, etc.), ISTM that when we start saying "so-and-so race commits more crime than xxx race", we're coming up with a rather convenient and flawed feel-good methodology to avoid the deeper problem and question: why do people commit crime? Race based arguments are old and tired to me: I don't want to hear them. Criminal intent is not an inherited gene, it's not nature, but all nurture, or, more appropriately I suppose, lack of nurture...

Society will always have crime, but, to me, the bigger crime is our not evaluating each crime, victim, or perpetrator on a case-by-case basis, rather we label them with nice and neat little stickers, like folders in our desk cabinets.

Ant


This is something I've been trying to get at (probably not as well as you though).

I'm not going to sit here and say "Well, black men between the ages of 16 and 38 commit more crime because they're bastards!" I'm also not going to say "Crime has nothing to do with race." because it does, society has ghettoized certain races perpetuating a life of crime.

What I'm trying to get at, is why the family and social ethos has broken down considerably more within many minority groups, leading to a higher crime rate.

The bottom line is that race doesn't have a role in crime. It's the individual (e.g. choice). Socioeconomic status may play a part, but not always. Race is just a statistical measure that's often played for the bias of those that use it. For example, the whole reason why this thread was created.



Just drive around LA or the slum area of any other medium to large city, and you will see incidents like "Clockwork Orange" all the time.  Youths that simply do not give a damn about anything but themselves, and will not hesitate to attack somebody else for a whim. 


All the time??? So if I go back to my old neighborhood, I'm just going to see it as a constant, right? Sorry, nope. Drive through the suburban areas as well and spend some time there. You are asking for your eyes to be opened and you will get what you ask for.

The bottom line is that race doesn't have a role in crime. It's the individual (e.g. choice). Socioeconomic status may play a part, but not always. Race is just a statistical measure that's often played for the bias of those that use it. For example, the whole reason why this thread was created.

All the time??? So if I go back to my old neighborhood, I'm just going to see it as a constant, right? Sorry, nope. Drive through the suburban areas as well and spend some time there. You are asking for your eyes to be opened and you will get what you ask for.



I lived for a year in a neighbourhood in south Fort Worth, TX which was reputed to be quite a bad one. However, I noticed immediately that the police had the place on lockdown and I never heard of any violent crime being committed there in that whole year. People are mainly good people who want to do what's right, however everyone has to battle his or her bad side. Some people lose that battle, and for many different reasons. The biggest one is probably greed, which is the downfall of the human race.

We all break the law in one way or another. I download music for free and I watch episodes of old TV programmes online and I know it's illegal, for instance. Other people steal office supplies, some others cheat on their taxes a bit. But most people are not violent or seriously criminally minded individuals, and they don't go around robbing people because they think better of themselves than that, and plus they know the risks and consequences and do not think they are worth it.

All the time??? So if I go back to my old neighborhood, I'm just going to see it as a constant, right? Sorry, nope. Drive through the suburban areas as well and spend some time there. You are asking for your eyes to be opened and you will get what you ask for.


All depends on your neighborhood.  I know that in several of mine, it was (and is) routine.  Take a walk through Garden Grove, either California or Idaho, and you will see attacks and muggings on a regular basis.  Especially in gangs, "Blood In - Blood Out" is still the normal practice in order to join.  And this happens all over the country.

3 years ago, I did a one night gig driving a doctor around in his limo on New Years Eve.  I took him to a club here in Dothan where he met up with some friends.  On the way out, he ran into one of his patients and started talking to her.  Her Ex-BF happened to be walking by and proceeded to beat the crap outta him ("Doc" was maybe 60, the redneck beating him was maybe 30).

I have lived in nice suburban areas.  I have also lived in "The Hood".  And I saw violence and crime in all of them.  I also saw people in the areas fighting against the degredation of their neighborhood.  


We all break the law in one way or another. I download music for free and I watch episodes of old TV programmes online and I know it's illegal, for instance. Other people steal office supplies, some others cheat on their taxes a bit. But most people are not violent or seriously criminally minded individuals, and they don't go around robbing people because they think better of themselves than that, and plus they know the risks and consequences and do not think they are worth it.


This is also true.  After all, nobody is perfect.  But thankfully, those that are willing to knowingly commit a violent crime are fairly low.  It is one thing to shoplift, but a very different thing to rob a liquor store at gunpoint.

What balony world do you live in? Prior to the creation of these stations, the questions/stereotypes were still there. Give me a break. The only ones glorifying it are those that profit from it (e.g. record companies, performers) and those foolish enough to follow. To say that an entire group glorifies something is just lazy. I guess white women glorify the "Girls Gone Wild" tapes as well.

If the only exposure you have to a certain group is on t.v., whose fault is other than yours, particularly when you have the capacity to do otherwise? People have been known to get out of their homes and "see the world", you know. There aren't any believable excuses. I could use the lazy excuse of saying all I could've known about whites was laid out on the boob tube. But I can't since I ventured out, met people, and saw them as individuals.


Yes..the stereotypes were there long before the creation of MTV, VH1, etc, no question in anyones mind.  However, from my perspective the constant bombardment from those stations have merely continued to keep those stereotypes alive.

A quote from Danoota:  >>What is with you that you form your opinions about anything from MTV?

Apparently, I am thinking along the same lines as the NAACP in this instance.  Here's a statement taken from their official website:

>>“We must recognize the need for balance within the African American community in regards to what we deem acceptable in music, film, and other media,� said NAACP Youth & College Division Director Stefanie L. Brown. �Images reflected in songs and music videos that show half-dressed African American women being objectified or demeaned by men, or young African American men as thugs must STOP. These kinds of images promote hurtful and false stereotypes of young African Americans.�

The targets of the STOP Campaign are the record and television industries, recording artists and the African American community. For more details on the campaign that includes a personal pledge, go online to: www.naacp.org.

Apparently in this case the NAACP views the negative image of MTV and VH1 in the same manner as I do, and for which I got my case jumped on for making the statement earlier that I did...or does the NAACP live in a "baloney" world as I am accused of??  Seems that if you compare my earlier statement and the quote from NAACP that while the words are different, the message is the same....

Yes..the "girls gone wild" series is also a crock, but that exposure to that culture is limited to a DVD series and the occasional late night infomercial, not the 24/7 bombardment that you receive on numerous stations throughout the country...a big difference.

.

A quote from Danoota:  >>What is with you that you form your opinions about anything from MTV?

Apparently, I am thinking along the same lines as the NAACP in this instance.  Here's a statement taken from their official website:

>>“We must recognize the need for balance within the African American community in regards to what we deem acceptable in music, film, and other media,� said NAACP Youth & College Division Director Stefanie L. Brown. �Images reflected in songs and music videos that show half-dressed African American women being objectified or demeaned by men, or young African American men as thugs must STOP. These kinds of images promote hurtful and false stereotypes of young African Americans.�

The targets of the STOP Campaign are the record and television industries, recording artists and the African American community. For more details on the campaign that includes a personal pledge, go online to: www.naacp.org.

Apparently in this case the NAACP views the negative image of MTV and VH1 in the same manner as I do, and for which I got my case jumped on for making the statement earlier that I did...or does the NAACP live in a "baloney" world as I am accused of??  Seems that if you compare my earlier statement and the quote from NAACP that while the words are different, the message is the same....

Yes..the "girls gone wild" series is also a crock, but that exposure to that culture is limited to a DVD series and the occasional late night infomercial, not the 24/7 bombardment that you receive on numerous stations throughout the country...a big difference.


The NAACP recognizes that there are people who form their opinions from the likes of MTV and VH1.  People who use MTV and VH1 as their basis for looking at the world are ignorant, not NAACP for recognizing that that fact is so.

The NAACP recognizes that there are people who form their opinions from the likes of MTV and VH1.  People who use MTV and VH1 as their basis for looking at the world are ignorant, not NAACP for recognizing that that fact is so.
I think the point he was making is that he makes the statement and is slammed for it because he is white....the NAACP makes the statement and everything's hunky dory.....it's a double standard.
It might also lie in the way you act in such a situation though.  People of any color warm up to me fairly quickly because I'm comfortable in any situation (except, of course, when I'm on the South Side of Chicago where I will most likely get stabbed if I look at someone wrong ;D ;D)

Then again, a lot of people have some subconscious xenophobia so whatcha gonna do...
Maybe you're right....I have been known to clam up when in a crowd where I don't know anyone.....but then again, you're not exactly white.  At the particular party, there were some hispanics, but I was definitely the only caucasian there.  We were standing in a group (we were introduced by the host so neither of us really knew anyone else) and I said something and no one responded.  When my friend repeated almost verbatim what I had said, comments abounded.  In other words, it was clear that I was not welcome.

The NAACP recognizes that there are people who form their opinions from the likes of MTV and VH1.  People who use MTV and VH1 as their basis for looking at the world are ignorant, not NAACP for recognizing that that fact is so.


Well then, I would be led to assume by the use of the word "we" by Ms. Brown that she is referring to the African American community by this statement?  >>We must recognize the need for balance within the African American community in regards to what we deem acceptable in music, film, and other media>>

Since she uses the term "within the African American community", I'd dare fashion a guess that she is inclined to believe that the AA community start policing themselves a bit more strictly??

This statement,"These kinds of images promote hurtful and false stereotypes of young African Americans.�...yes, she's probably right, and it is a 24/7 stereotype, glorified in the name of rappers and their producers in one big money grab.

Funny also that if I read your reply to my post where you say that "People who use MTV and VH1 as their basis for looking at the world are ignorant, not NAACP for recognizing that that fact is so."  Since the last line of the NAACP statement says "The targets of the STOP Campaign are the record and television industries, recording artists and the African American community.", then I would read that as:

No mention of the NAACP targeting any community except the African American community..why is that??  If the white population is the target, and the whites are the ignorant ones, why is the NAACP targeting the black community??  It almost sounds to me that it's recognized that the black community are perceived as the ignorant ones, if I'm to believe your statements (about ignorance) and the statements posted on the NAACP web site.

Could it be that they just don't want to come right out and say they're going to target the perceptions within the white community??  If so, why would they be afraid to say so??

Could it be that the NAACP recognizes that the biggest enemy the black man has facing him today is the black man himself??

What does NAACP stand for?

If something doesn't help people of color advance in society, then it's got to go.  It is high time the NAACP launched an aggressive campaign against the exploitative hip-hop culture.  However, I don't remember the NAACP ever endorsing it.

The Right usurps Dr. King's quote, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character," to bludgeon liberals who believe in affirmative action and other such remedies.  However, their misuse of this quote is specious.  It is folly to believe we live in a colorblind society when we most emphatically DO NOT.  I too share Dr. King's dream, and it is sad that 45 years later we have not achieved it.  I believe those who proclaim the Republican party is here to make Dr. King's dream come true are horribly cynical.

This is not to say that African-American leaders have neither corrupted nor delayed the realization of Dr. King's dream.  There is cynicism and self-interest at play amongst them as well, but let he who is without sin cast the first stone!  In the '90s I saw the African-American leadership on the UMass campus instigate savage divisiveness.  When I dealt with students under the influence of this leadership, I felt a seething hatrad towards me for the color of my skin.  I saw a great many of the anectdotes Dinesh D'Souza described in "Illiberal Education" replicated before my very eyes.  I didn't like the wrath; I didn't like being called "racist."  However, I put these problems into perspective.  A capsized boat will roil, rock, and submerge and emerge with what seems to be intractible violence, but if you persist, eventually you will right the boat, bail it out, and row onwards.  That's how I see the problems of racism in this country today; however, to deny white racism still works agains people of color is as foolhardy as pretending a boat is righted when it is not.

Yes..the stereotypes were there long before the creation of MTV, VH1, etc, no question in anyones mind.  However, from my perspective the constant bombardment from those stations have merely continued to keep those stereotypes alive.



>>“We must recognize the need for balance within the African American community in regards to what we deem acceptable in music, film, and other media,� said NAACP Youth & College Division Director Stefanie L. Brown. �Images reflected in songs and music videos that show half-dressed African American women being objectified or demeaned by men, or young African American men as thugs must STOP. These kinds of images promote hurtful and false stereotypes of young African Americans.�


I believe that's the spirit behind the social justice website www.HotGhettoMess.com, which campagins for the negative stereotypes to be elimineted or at least not celebrated.

Interestingly there is a protest movement growing against this web site.  :-\\

I believe that's the spirit behind the social justice website www.HotGhettoMess.com, which campagins for the negative stereotypes to be elimineted or at least not celebrated.

Interestingly there is a protest movement growing against this web site.  :-\\


I just checked out that site and it's certainly interesting.  The opening comments from the editor give credence to one of the biggest problems facing the black community today.  While it does address social injustice, rights, etc., it does not stop there and points blame equally(if not more so) to the black community itself.

Just a quick paragraph from his opening notes:

>>Frankly, the blame game is getting real tired. There is simply no excuse for not maintaining a high standard for yourself and your children. And by high standards I don’t mean expensive stuff, I means high standards of character. We already squander our considerable spending power on stuff and look where’s its gotten us. Yes, yes I know there is racism, there is inequality of opportunity, gross disparities in education and health care. But my reasoning is, BECAUSE there are all these things, it is even more imperative that we look inward and strengthen our communities ourselves. When I was growing up, my mother used to tell me that I had to be twice as good as my white counterparts to be considered equal. And of course we still have to fight the big fights for civil rights, health care reform, equality in education, economic opportunity but I just don’t see how we can do that when our own communities are in shambles. Those fights require cohesion and strength. Two things we are struggling with in the black community right now.

Wow..recognition of the problem without all the finger pointing at "somebody else" as the blame only...what a remarkable concept !!

I'm sure there is growing opposition to this site, and I'm sure that while no races who opposed it were mentioned (or that I've thus far read there) I'll bet that the opposition will come from both sides of the spectrum...black and white, or in the interests of fairness, white and black....

Why is it that people who talk of "character" and lecture others about the merits of "character" never....always seem to be...

Oh never mind.
:-X

Why is it that people who talk of "character" and lecture others about the merits of "character" never....always seem to be...



...full of character?

...full of character?

Oh, they're characters alright, there's no denying that!
:D

It is folly to believe we live in a colorblind society when we most emphatically DO NOT.  I too share Dr. King's dream, and it is sad that 45 years later we have not achieved it.  I believe those who proclaim the Republican party is here to make Dr. King's dream come true are horribly cynical.


We will always have such problems.  Sadly, it is just human nature.  Some people simply insist on placing all of the problems of the world on somebody else.  Be it blacks, Jews, Sunni, or some other group.

And in the same way, it is wrong to place them on a group simply because you are political opponants.  Blaming "The Republicans" is just as wrong.  And it ignores the large number of Democrats who have behaved reprehensibly over the same issues.

As well as ignores the large number of Republicans who have strived to make things better.  Instead of pointing fingers at this group or that group, why not point it at the true casue, ignorant butts who are prejudiced and bigoted?

We will always have such problems.  Sadly, it is just human nature.  Some people simply insist on placing all of the problems of the world on somebody else.  Be it blacks, Jews, Sunni, or some other group.

And in the same way, it is wrong to place them on a group simply because you are political opponants.  Blaming "The Republicans" is just as wrong.  And it ignores the large number of Democrats who have behaved reprehensibly over the same issues.

As well as ignores the large number of Republicans who have strived to make things better.  Instead of pointing fingers at this group or that group, why not point it at the true casue, ignorant butts who are prejudiced and bigoted?

Both parties are culpable because they both sold out to the interests of corporations above the interests of the people.

Both parties are culpable because they both sold out to the interests of corporations above the interests of the people.


How about not blaming parties at all?  Why not blame the individuals themselves.

Both parties have both helped and hindered the Civil Rights Movement.  Did you know that as a Senator, JFK voted against every Civil Rights law?  And at the same time, Richard Nixon voted in favor of them?  And while blaming the Republicans may seem "right", it ignores the large number of Democrats who have fought against changes, everybody from George Wallace and Son to David Duke (who politically started as a classic 1960's "Southern Democrat", but has bounced between parties regularly ever since).

Both parties have both helped and hindered the Civil Rights Movement.  Did you know that as a Senator, JFK voted against every Civil Rights law? 


Correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm a bit confused on this one and I don't have access to the final roll call:

Kennedy voted for the final passage of the 1957 Civil Rights Act behest of LBJ, even though it provided for jury trials in litigation.  The Southern Dems were in favor of this amendment because all-white juries would not convict a good ole boy for a colored plaintiff. Thus the 1957 act is often referred to as "toothless."

Southern strategy.  Not JFK's finest hour.  But not JFK's Civil Rights legacy either.

Anyway.....

If I voted Republican, I wouldn't want to talk about my party's official or de facto positions on race-related issues since the 1960s either.  I would certainly say, "Let's not talk about parties, let's talk about individuals," and talk about all the rednecks and Dixiecrats of yore who supported the Dems before Black '64
;D

Not JFK's finest hour.  But not JFK's Civil Rights legacy either.


And neither was his (and Bobby's) siccing the FBI on Martin Luther King.  And many (both inside and outside his staff) have said that one of the reasons he rarely mentioned the Civil Rights movement was out of fear of alienating Southern Democrats.  The JFK administration in fact had more investigations against Civil RIghts groups then it did against the Klan.

Luckily, LBJ was much more willing to take the issue head-on.  Being a Southerner himself, it was hard for other southerners to complain that he was an "outsider meddling in local affairs".  For the most part, the Civil Rights movement stagnated between the Eisenhauer and Johnson administrations.

And neither was his (and Bobby's) siccing the FBI on Martin Luther King.  And many (both inside and outside his staff) have said that one of the reasons he rarely mentioned the Civil Rights movement was out of fear of alienating Southern Democrats.  The JFK administration in fact had more investigations against Civil RIghts groups then it did against the Klan.

Luckily, LBJ was much more willing to take the issue head-on.  Being a Southerner himself, it was hard for other southerners to complain that he was an "outsider meddling in local affairs".  For the most part, the Civil Rights movement stagnated between the Eisenhauer and Johnson administrations.

You should get together with my old man and talk about the Kennedy boys.  He holds the same opinion!
I don't say the Kennedys are saints myself, and I think it's important that Jack and Bobby's failed attempts on Castro and collusions with Hoover not be lost in a romantic haze.
Just prior to his assassination Bobby Kennedy called Cesar Chavez "One of the heroic figures of our time," and was spent time with Chavez in Delano, where the UFW had struck.

Both Jack and Bobby were undergoing sea changes when they were assassinated within five years of each other.

You should get together with my old man and talk about the Kennedy boys.  He holds the same opinion!
I don't say the Kennedys are saints myself, and I think it's important that Jack and Bobby's failed attempts on Castro and collusions with Hoover not be lost in a romantic haze.
Just prior to his assassination Bobby Kennedy called Cesar Chavez "One of the heroic figures of our time," and was spent time with Chavez in Delano, where the UFW had struck.

Both Jack and Bobby were undergoing sea changes when they were assassinated within five years of each other.



As was Malcolm X.  As soon as he started saying that their was more to poverty than race and that all disenfranchised should work together

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/01/ak.gif

As was Malcolm X.  As soon as he started saying that their was more to poverty than race and that all disenfranchised should work together

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/01/ak.gif




"Of course we intend to keep a sense of humor...the serious people like Ghandi, and John Kennedy, and Martin Luther King all got shot!"*

---John Lennon

I don't mean to make light of it, but I find I have to keep a sense of humor too, because I missed the age of earnest hope and found myself in the age of cynicism!  I see the potential for great things had the Kennedys, Dr. King, and Malcolm X been allowed to live to ripe old ages....maybe we wouldn't be in so much trouble with the frikkin' bozos running the place today.  You know, maybe if Bobby Kennedy got to be president in 1968, there would have been no President Nixon, no President Reagan, no Bush dynasty, no fascist neo-con crazies at the levers of power.  Yeah, I think a lot of bad people could see that in 1968 and it makes me wonder if Sirhan Sirhan acted alone!
>:(

*He did say this at one point, but the only place I've heard it was sampled on a Negativland record.