American identity, black in a multi-culti world, el's rabbit trails, Uncategorized

How we got here, part 2.

Since my children have already heard all of it, this is a detour of self-indulgent thought sharing. Call it a rabbit trail post, as I continue the discussion started here.

One of the things that rankles me about the discussions concerning the newly resurgent “race problem” in the U.S. is the intellectual dishonesty found on both sides of the issue. I am not so foolish as to think that with my brown skin and black American heritage, I can offer an unbiased opinion. This topic is a charged one and no matter what anyone says about it, someone is going to decide that the thoughts of the person offering them are tainted. I know I often do.

However, as much as I understand the value of knowing who we are, where we came from, and what it means to our children, I am far more invested in Christ’s Eternal Kingdom than I am in anything that happens in this country. More than that, I am convinced that the person who puts his trust in princes or the systems of men is foolish, no matter how smart he sounds. I don’t expect that person to hear me either. If it isn’t apparent to anyone who claims to be a Christian that this entire world lies under the sway of the evil one, any argument about it would be vain.

Nevertheless, a fair and true historical exposition of how we got where we are in this country is in order. Few seem able or willing to hear anything but good about themselves and bad things about “the others”. Christianity in America is already stuck somewhere between a shambles and a joke, so the last thing we need to do is to jump on the ethnic/nationalist bandwagon and forget that we are ambassadors for another kingdom, that this one is not our home. To that end, I figured it’s a good idea to put all of the ideas of the people hell bent on a war under the light of scrutiny. I’ll start with the white nationalist side today, but I have just as many rebuttals to offer to the other side, so save any assumptions.

I have heard a common argument parroted again and again and again and again and…well you get the point. I’ve heard it a lot, and it’s this: that minorities (that is, non-Asian minorities) simply refuse to allow good white folk to live peaceable and separate from the rest of us riff raff. That basically, left to their own devices, people naturally segregate and the only reason this natural phenomena isn’t allowed to play out is because, just like feminists insist on invading male spaces, blacks (and other NAMs) insist on invading white spaces.

Again, I submit that history, recent and of course not so recent, bear out that it is not blacks and other NAMs who are “guilty” of this incursion. It is as it has always been in America, that money and the desire for power is at the root of the diversity in this country, whether the diversity of happenstance or the diversity imposed by legal fiat. I want to get back to that quote from Frederick Douglass that I ended the last post in this series with, because it really does say it all:

“What shall we do with the Negro?” I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are wormeaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall! I am not for tying or fastening them on the tree in any way, except by nature’s plan, and if they will not stay there, let them fall. And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him alone!”

We all know that this is not what happened, but if the negro had been “left alone” in the first place, there would have been no need for anyone to try and figure out what to do with him when he was loosed from his chains. In other words, this whole thing -at least where black Americans are concerned- started with money grubbing Westerners (aided by greedy, traitorous Africans) invading African space and bringing black people into their “white space” by force.

I know that plenty of people assume any mention of slavery is an attempt to invoke white guilt, but that’s not my point. I don’t expect my neighbors up and down the street to feel an ounce of guilt or obligation to me for something their ancestors did. It’s probably more accurate to assume that for most of them, their ancestors weren’t even here yet to be able to own slaves. Also (historical note), there were plenty of white Southerners who were far too poor to own slaves, many of whom were sharecroppers right alongside the newly freed black slaves. Consider that my obligatory disclaimer against attempts to invoke white guilt. None of that however, changes my original assertion: it wasn’t black people invading white spaces that started all of this.

In every decade between the Emancipation and the Civil Rights Act, under great stress and hardship, black people did relatively well on all indices related to the kind of foundation needed to build a strong, functional community. Thomas Sowell has done an excellent job laying all of these facts out. Rather than rehash what has already been done and done well, I’ll simply offer an overview, and include detailed links later. Thomas Sowell is all about the facts, not laced with heavy bits of opinionated and emotional feel good rhetoric, to his credit:

The black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and discrimination, began rapidly disintegrating in the liberal welfare state that subsidized unwed pregnancy and changed welfare from an emergency rescue to a way of life.

Government social programs such as the War on Poverty were considered a way to reduce urban riots. Such programs increased sharply during the 1960s. So did urban riots. Later, during the Reagan administration, which was denounced for not promoting social programs, there were far fewer urban riots.

Neither the media nor most of our educational institutions question the assumptions behind the War on Poverty. Even conservatives often attribute much of the progress that has been made by lower-income people to these programs.

For example, the usually insightful quarterly magazine City Journal says in its current issue: “Beginning in the mid-sixties, the condition of most black Americans improved markedly.”

That is completely false and misleading.

The economic rise of blacks began decades earlier, before any of the legislation and policies that are credited with producing that rise. The continuation of the rise of blacks out of poverty did not — repeat, did not — accelerate during the 1960s.

The poverty rate among black families fell from 87 percent in 1940 to 47 percent in 1960, during an era of virtually no major civil rights legislation or anti-poverty programs. It dropped another 17 percentage points during the decade of the 1960s and one percentage point during the 1970s, but this continuation of the previous trend was neither unprecedented nor something to be arbitrarily attributed to the programs like the War on Poverty.

In various skilled trades, the incomes of blacks relative to whites more than doubled between 1936 and 1959 — that is, before the magic 1960s decade when supposedly all progress began. The rise of blacks in professional and other high-level occupations was greater in the five years preceding the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than in the five years afterwards.

While some good things did come out of the 1960s, as out of many other decades, so did major social disasters that continue to plague us today. Many of those disasters began quite clearly during the 1960s.

But what are mere facts compared to a heady vision?

This “heady vision” Sowell mentions is again, another instance of do-gooder liberal whites (or seditious Jewish cultural revolutionaries depending on who you ask) meddling with “the others”, not the other way around. Whether it was racists harassing my grandmother and grandfather-in-law for daring to buy 100 acres of land far out in the country away from neighbors of any color, or welfare promoters incentivizing fatherless families, or affirmative action champions attempting to level the playing fields which Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, and the prolific Zora Neale Hurston urged against, it was usually others stoking the fires of entitlement and discontent among people who initially wanted the opportunity to achieve or not on the merits of their ability.

Like anyone else (see the women of 2017), when you get used to being handed freebies, coddled, and pushed to the front of the line long enough, your behaviors and expectations evolve accordingly. People believing they are owed a debt that can never be repaid will make trouble.

This is equally true, albeit to a lesser degree, when referring to other NAMs and immigrants. White liberals and media pundits constantly tell these people that the rule of law does not apply to them, that they -non citizens!- have Constitutional protections, and that anyone who dares to suggest they be held to the same legal standards as the rest of us are racists.

The sad part, as The Practical Conservative pointed out in this thread, is that black liberals have foolishly allowed communists and gangsters to act as their political operatives then blame white people for their lack of progress. The bad politics, bad behavior and politically opportunistic conflation engaged in by so-called black leaders is probably the major source of the problem. That is, if you believe blacks should be politically agitating at all in 2017, which I do not.

This is long, so we’ll have to continue it next week.


20 thoughts on “How we got here, part 2.”

  1. I read this and I am grateful that you started out with a reminder to Christians that in the final analysis this is all academic.

    It makes reading the rest easily to do cool headedly.


  2. Well, that was cryptic, Scott.

    I should add a footnote- again- that conflating America with Europe is an apples to okra comparison. Europe is indeed being invaded. However, even that is being made possible with the aid of do gooder (or seditious take your pick), liberals


  3. My grandparents had some land stolen from them by white people when my father was a child. After a long legal battle my father took it back. Many people (the descendants of the thieves) thought that he should let it go, but I am glad that he did not. I think that every black person who has been robbed in this way should take their land back if they can.

    If black people had been treated the same as white people from the time that Frederick Douglas made that statement then black people would in an entirely different and vastly improved situation. However, instead they stole from and discriminated against black people and created a white middle class through government programs. This contributed to the dramatic difference in black and white net worth and I believe it is a wrong that should be righted.

    I agree with TPC on the communists and gangsters. But black people have been complaining about these types for years. It is hard to get rid of them because the media loves them. Garvey’s Ghost is also spot on about how black misleaders have allowed other groups to feed off of the black struggle. The gay rights groups piggybacked on the black struggle as well, although at least there was some push back from the black church on that. However, liberals and conservatives are in agreement about not actually serving their black constituents.

    You don’t think that black people should be politically agitating in 2017? There are poor black communities with 50% levels of unemployment for black men, really bad schools and high crime rates. When this happens to a lesser extent to white people they certainly insist that the government intervene. Why shouldn’t black people?


  4. Well since I consider the Jackson/Sharpton/Maxine Waters types among the communists and gangsters which I have watched black people rally around my whole life, I beg to differ on the idea that black people in the main haven’t enabled and encouraged these people.

    It is no secret my thoughts on government as a solution to almost anything not related to borders, national security, and mail delivery so I will refrain from having that debate today.


  5. You forgot John Lewis. For every black person I know who supports Al Sharpton, I know 3 that wish he would go sit down somewhere. LOL.

    For some reason conservatives always complain about government intervention while taking large amounts of government money and using it to their benefit. Afterwards they pretend that it never happened and that they pulled themselves up by their bootstraps. Then when it comes to black people they suddenly remember their ultra conservative, small government principles and tell black people that they should not expect the government to do anything for them. Rinse and repeat throughout American history to the present.


  6. There is a distinction to be made between functional and dysfunctional welfare. Whites got the functional stuff, and blacks for the most part did not. Even now, health care and education are the current functional welfare paths by which the middle class is being formed and a lack of admitting that’s what it is serves as an obstacle to black people having access to the functional part with the good jobs attached. I’ve had to go to the doctor a lot, I can see the demographics for myself on that one.


  7. BTW – I agree that the situations in Europe and America are completely different. However a lot of the immigrants to Europe (African especially) are from places that they colonized or otherwise interfered with. Another case of white westerners meddling with people (and benefiting financially) and then complaining about them later.


  8. There is a distinction to be made between functional and dysfunctional welfare. Whites got the functional stuff, and blacks for the most part did not. Even now, health care and education are the current functional welfare paths by which the middle class is being formed and a lack of admitting that’s what it is serves as an obstacle to black people having access to the functional part with the good jobs attached. I’ve had to go to the doctor a lot, I can see the demographics for myself on that one.

    This!!! But instead of insisting that blacks also receive the functional welfare that whites receive the conversation turns to “bootstraps” and “doing for self” and the evils of government involvement.


  9. Hi Elspeth, glad to see you are blogging. Interesting topic, but it has many tangents. I want to address one statement you made.

    ” In other words, this whole thing -at least where black Americans are concerned- started with money grubbing Westerners(aided by greedy, traitorous Africans) invading African space and bringing black people into their “white space” by force.”

    I would like to see you expound on this statement because it is at the crux of the subject. Can you define “westerners”? Are you claiming that the people who purchased Africans as slaves that were then sold in The United States of America came from lands from the west of….Africa? Africa is a continent and while the entire continent has been and still is a mecca for slavery (where as The United States of America and many British holdings and European nations OUTLAWED slavery. In fact I can not think of a single country that is not majority caucasian that has outlawed slavery.) I would be interested in where you got the races, ethnicities and nationalities of the slave traders that sold to North America, particularly the USA. Which was if not the smallest market, close to it and the buyers and holders were not only “white”.

    Second, how can the Africans be considered traitors? On the continent of Africa there are many countries and several races. Each country breaks down further into regional tribes. There is slavery there currently. Who were they being traitors against? Warring tribes take slaves and sell them. That is their culture. The muslims enslave there, that is their religion. Different races (all non white) enslave each other. If my tribes goes to war with yours, wins, and sells off some losers I am not being a traitor.

    Last how did these westerners invade Africa to do this? Are we talking muslim jihad, British colonization or something else? Because it sounds like you are claiming white Americans invaded Africa and stole or bought slaves and brought them back to a “white” USA. I guess this would be news to the large native American and Mexican populations at this time that the USA was a “white space” as well as a shocking revelation that the 13 colonies invaded the continent of Africa and apparently won.
    So I think it is important to define terms, provide backing and understand history when discussing topics. Off the cuff, your statement makes no sense.

    Thanks so much.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. I have a busy morning, Carlotta and I hope to get back to you later, but you have misread my post. I never said anyone brought Africans to a white USA. In fact I think I said “white”. The quotes were to imply that this land was not white contrary to many WN ratings. And there was no USA to speak of when slavery began here.

    I will try not to be insulted by your insinuation that I don’t realize that Africa is a continent. I actually mention a few of the specific African countries the slaves came from in the comments of the first post in the series.

    I am suspecting that you either haven’t read the posts carefully or are bringing your assumptions to bear and interpreting things I CLEARLY did not say.


  11. Actually Carlotta, I don’t expect I will have time later this afternoon so I want to ask that you read carefully posts and comments because I am really not getting how you’re getting what you’re getting:

    And I haven’t finished yet, so (for the umpteenth time) save any assumptions until I say I’m done.

    By traitorous Africans, I am referring to the Africans in West Africa who sold their fellow Africans to the Western slavers in the first place, Is any of this really so confusing and erroneous?

    I don’t see where a “definition of terms” is needed. By westerners, I mean the Europeans who took the slaves to their countries (whether in Europe or the Americas) as slaves.

    Okay, I am pretty much done with this till Monday when I explore black liberal hypocrisy and piss Nonya off, LOL.

    But keep this in mind please. I am offering this using the presupposed and often argued logic by race baiting Americans (both black and white) that black and white are real and true ethinicities all their own. That’s how we talk in America. No regard for ethnic or tribal ancestry. Just “white” “black” “Hispanic” (LOL), and Asian. So THAT is why I am using the language I am using. I don’t lack the education you presume to be offering me.


  12. For Carlotta and reference: Humans are jerkfaces, and a traditional consequence of losing a war is being enslaved. My Swedish ancestors enslaved my Irish ancestors and sold them into Russia and as far south as the Middle East. Slavery is something humans do to each other. We have (invisible/unofficial) slaves here in the States right now. Everybody has done the slave thing. Humans.Aren’t.Nice.

    The difference with African slaves is 1) the mass release of the slaves post-Civil War and 2) the racial difference – the baby that the slave woman had because her master raped her looks a lot different than the baby his wife bore him… and that color difference was treated differently, generations out. My history isn’t fabulous, but I tend to think that a third-generation European slavechild had some opportunity to free him or herself. Or that they weren’t bred in the same numbers… slaves were household property, not farm equipment to do mass agriculture.

    I don’t know that anyone else has released slaves en masse, certainly not in situations that made it impossible for those slaves to go home to their countries of origin. (This should not be interpreted as a “go to Africa” statement, this is me thinking, “so… I know the Israelites eventually went home to Jerusalem after Babylon… did anyone else have this happen? did they stay? Please feel free to inform my history).

    So, eventually you have people blending in all societies, and you have some prejudice about that until adversity makes everyone chum up. That seems like a human thing too. I might be Irish, but I’m no Celt – this ruddy skin and heavy build? No. But when we’re all fighting the French, I am recognizably one of the home team. Consider how the Han Chinese feel about minority/ethnic Chinese…

    So how is the American experience different? 1) Sheer numbers 2) Visible racial differences 3) Wacky theories at the turn of the century that led to eugenics etc 4) The continual prejudice against freed people, which I think has a lot to do with #3, and maybe some to do with the fact that the white folks hadn’t enslaved each other in a few centuries, so they’d lost the understanding of “this could happen to me”.

    But let’s NOT pretend that everyone hasn’t taken slaves at some point. Humans do this.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Okay, I am pretty much done with this till Monday when I explore black liberal hypocrisy and piss Nonya off, LOL.

    Not sure why you think this would piss me off. I talk about black liberal hypocrisy all of the time. I just don’t pretend that conservatives are any less hypocritical when it comes to black people.


  14. Thank you, Hearth. I was going to track down all sorts of links and citations to educate Carlotta on the extent of slavery between nations of Europe, but I find I am not interested enough to bother.

    And of course, the people who enslaved Africans here in the U.S. were not other Africans. Not sure how she missed that. I actually laughed.


  15. I just want to be sure here, so what I quoted from your post was either something I made up, was written as satire or never existed? I was addressing that quote. And yes, if you still think blacks did not own black slaves here in during the original 13 colonies, the USA before the civil war AND elsewhere including right now….you should not laugh. You might want to also read up on the massive Irish slave trade, many to black owners.


  16. @Hearth
    Have you done any research into the ancestry of those owning the slaves and imlorting them? Any research into the birth of planned parenthood and the populations they targeted? Guess what, “white” is not the answer.


  17. Last you are not a traitor when you enslave someone unless you and they had some kind of binding allegence you are breaking. Having black skin is not a bond in Africa. Tribes have bonds, countrymen have bonds, religions have bonds but it is the reverse of the USA. You are not your skin color first. So this is not treason is my point, there was no loyalty expected. Just like a Russian owes no loyalty to a white Englishman a a white Muslim is not going to protect a white Christian against other Muslim because they are white.


  18. -looks quizzical- Duh. Everyone knows about Margaret Sanger. See, “Whacky theories around the turn of the century”. One can have a lot of “fun” looking up theories of evolution and eugenics, well-intentioned and not. They didn’t lose favor entirely until the Nazis explored the end of the logic chain.

    Also lose a war and you get sold as a slave. I’m aware that it was Africans selling Africans to the white traders who then transported them to the Western world. That was pretty much my point. Everyone did slaves back in the day, ain’t nobody here got clean hands. I don’t feel like being someone who buys humans and treats them with less consideration than is generally given to a dog is any more moral than being the person who actually does the capturing.

    The more interesting questions IMO are…

    What, then, makes the black population here in the States different than other ex-slave populations in other places and other times? *Is* it different, or are we simply impatient and ignorant of history? (I don’t know, that’s a question).

    How does this differ from other conquered/imported/interbred populations throughout history? Did those populations end up making microcultures within the main society, blending with it, going home, being eradicated, or turned into a lower-caste within the main culture? (again, a question). If all of the above, which was the most successful choice for that population, and what demographic similarities (if any) do those populations have with the black population of America in 2017?

    There’s lots of interesting conversation to be had, none of which surrounds getting excited about whether or not white people are innocent. We aren’t, and neither is anyone else. Next?


  19. Yes, Carlotta. I am crystal clear about tribes, war, treason etc. I thought I made it clear that i was highlighting the often parroted arguments offered in America.

    However, since I am not my skin color first (Christian, woman, wife, mother, etc), and you believe that I AM my skin color first, our communication gap can’t really be bridged.

    I will close with the fact that there was a time in THIS country when people with white skin (who were not Southern) actually did identify themselves as something other than “white” first. They were Polish or Irish or Italian.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s