We seem to have come to another turning point in race relations, thanks to recent events in Ferguson and New York City among others. But the conversation, to date, hasn’t been healthy. The familiar memes of “lazy, indigent, violent”, versus “oppressed, racist, unfair” haven’t been bridged; they consist of two “sides” yapping at each other, to no good end.
Some caveats: First, I’m white. I don’t pretend to understand what it’s like to be black in the United States. Second, I’m a registered independent, I’ve voted both ways and for various independents, and I hold positions that both parties would identify with. Third, my career is in business (manufacturing), and so I have a bias to facts, data and root-cause analysis, and I don’t hold a lot of truck with unsubstantiated opinions.
I’m not going to spend a lot of time acknowledging the racism that does exist in the US. Those of you who are black know it far better than I, and many of you who are white will understand and agree. For the record: Racism is real, in overt and more frequently in covert forms.
And… (I’ve come to substitute “and” for “but”)… there is another angle. An example, from my own life: As the General Manager of a factory, I had many black employees, and one of them (I’ll call him Jim) was especially good with the paperwork, and agitating for a promotion. An opportunity came, and I did choose him for a production planning job. He did great. A chance came for another promotion, to Account Manager. I didn’t think he was right for the job, and I told him so, but he pressed hard and a few others spoke on his behalf, and against my better judgment, I promoted him again. It was a disaster. Jim was disorganized, and customers didn’t like him. I returned him to his former position, but maintained his pay. He filed suit at the State Commission Against Discrimination, claiming he’d been demoted because of his race. I told him, to his face, that he was acting the victim; I’d promoted him twice, arranged for the company to make him two loans, and had thorough documentation to demote him. A couple of weeks later, Jim told me that he’d been thinking of dropping the suit, although he still thought I was a racist. I asked him not to. I wanted my day in court.
A week later, Jim dropped the suit.
A year later, he invited me to his wedding. I met his mother, a Baptist Minister from Newark. What a hot ticket.
I relate this story because none of it is unusual. I’ve seen it too many times, firsthand. It’s called victimization. But is it? Or were Jim’s thoughts just the hard-wired instinctual reaction to real instances –no, doubt, real — that occurred in his past?
In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Harvard sociologist then serving as Assistant Secretary of Labor under Lyndon Johnson, and later US Ambassador to India and to the UN and a four-term senator — and a liberal if there ever was one — wrote a report titled “The Negro Family — The Case For National Action”. Moynihan argued that a destructive vein in the black community had led to the rise of a “tangle of pathology”, the heart of which was “the deterioration of the negro family”, the primary manifestation of which was the rise of the percentage of black children living in single-parent households. At the time, that figure was 25%.
There was a storm over the report. Despite the fact that Moynihan argued that part of the solution was to provide better opportunities for blacks, liberals including the NAACP claimed that Moynihan was racist and insensitive, and that he was “blaming the victim”.
But Moynihan proved prescient. Today, the percentage of black kids raised in single-parent households –the vast majority of those parents being women — is nearly 70%. To be fair, the rate for whites has risen as well, but only to 26%.
The genesis of Moynihan’s report was deep in data. Until about 1960, rates of blacks receiving welfare were strongly correlated with black male unemployment. That correlation broke down in the early ’60s: black male unemployment fell during that time, but black welfare cases rose. His conclusion was that the breakdown in the correlation was caused by the breakdown of the black family; for whatever reason, black males were abandoning their families, and the females had to apply for welfare to support themselves and their children.
I’m no sociologist and I don’t whether whether Moynihan’s conclusion is correct. But the data speaks for itself, and 70% of children being raised in single-family homes is nothing short of a community disaster. To state the obvious, single-parent kids are much more likely to be impoverished, and single parents (again, the vast majority mothers) don’t have as much time or money as dual-parent households to spend on their children.
How can a single mother, working at least one job and perhaps more, find the time and money to take her kids to the museum? And if kids don’t get that kind of opportunity, where are they supposed to go in their lives?
Generations of black kids — and a fair number of whites as well — are growing up in an environment with five strikes against them. It explains all manner of malignant developments. I won’t belabor that point.
I’m no fan of Rick Santorum, but he said one thing during the 2012 campaign that struck me: he contended that if someone gets a job, even a minimum wage job, before getting married, and gets married before having children, the children have less than a 2% chance of being raised in poverty. I checked the numbers. He’s right.
It’s also odd that the black community has adopted the n-word, in various forms, as its own. I say “odd” because no other racial or ethnic group condones the use of a slur within its own community. Jews, Irish, Chinese and Italians, just as a few examples — all of whom have faced discrimination, although not to the same degree as blacks — don’t refer to themselves as “kikes”, “micks”, “chinks” or “wops”; neither do whites refer to themselves as “honkeys”.
It seems to an outsider — again, I’m white — that blacks’ use of the n-word reveals either self-hatred or an apathetic response to acceptance of their perceived place in our society — a way, albeit not exactly transparent, of accepting victimization.
Is this correct? I don’t know. But here’s the point: among whites, this is the perception, and perception, for better or worse, is (their) reality.
I write this not to take one side or the other. That racism exists and is a major obstacle to blacks in this country is undeniable, and I think there is a lot of truth as well to the notion that the back community has imploded on itself.
But largely, no one is talking with opposing points of view. Twitter is a morass of talking “at”, not “with” and I don’t see much evidence of constructive dialogue in the rest of society either. Today’s politicians are gutless cowards bribed by special interests and there is no leadership –meaning someone in power looking objectively at the whole of the story– coming from anyone. It’s going to take hard and honest conversations, like the one described above with “Jim”, to make any progress. Absent that, we’ll be arguing “at” each other 50 years from now, and saying nothing new.
An epilogue, lest anyone think that the incidents involving “Jim” portray only one side of the story: A year after the wedding, an employee on the night shift left a note for Jim in which he used the n-word, directed at Jim. I confronted a likely suspect; he confessed.
I fired him on the spot.
jogos de vestirHave Designer Wears for Men
porno If you want to know about those movies
Nuni SLEEVELESS DEEP PLACKET POLO
porno a black tunic and palazzo pants
Yellow Zuit Suits and Armani Suits
porno how to offer hand-made circumstances to child
Benefit You Will Get In Attending Fashion School
transformice They’ll be back any minute now
Celebrate the Special Occasion Be ready to be Dressed
free porn sites with much hard work
What Is the Force That Wears Down the Soles of Your Shoes
milf porn Aeropostale anticipates diluted earnings per share of
Which Is The Best Fashion Design Course In Singapore
xhamster singing cowboy Herb Jeffries
Womens Apparel Seeks To Become More Environmentally Friendly
cartoon porn Farouk was a complete kleptomaniac