How'd the civil rights movement compare to earlier attempts to attain black rights?

Status
Closed

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,801
USA
Well no I'm saying that he had a point about immigration negatively affecting Black people.

But since you brought it up we don't really need legal immigration from Africa, Asia, South America or any other place really. The amount of legal immigrants that really contribute anything long term and don't just leave after they get what they want are few and far between. Do we really need another British actor or is this a job that could just as easily go to an American?
Of course the US needs immigrants, they are the life blood of American commerce and society, it keeps the nation fresh and lively, allowing hard working foreigners to bring strong work ethic, ingenuity, and success to a country that would otherwise stagnate and die. The issue isn't immigration, its unchecked/uncontrolled immigration of refuge class for political purposes (creating voting blocks) at a time where its economically unfeasible to put them on the welfare dole as soon as they make it into the US. But for productive individuals, as long as their arrival doesn't overwhelm the system (like tech industry buying politicians to authorize mass issuing of H-1B visas to hire cheaper employees in lieu of citizens), then its not a problem.

If the black American actor is as good or better than the black from the UK they'll get the part, its as simple as that. If they aren't as capable, they shouldn't get the part.
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,638
Benin City, Nigeria
Want to address African Americans, civil rights, and the future of Black America? Then this stuff better be included in the conversation:

Was the Moynihan Report right? Sobering findings after 1965 study is revisited

Otherwise it will not be an honest conversation.
My understanding is that the Moynihan report is basically how the term "blaming the victim" was popularized or even how it originated. I'm not saying that that is all that the report is doing, or that Moynihan himself intentionally set out to do that, but I think that simply pointing at single-parent families isn't a sufficient explanation. Especially since the entire trend of single parent families being preponderant could be closely connected to the problems of inequality that African Americans faced in trying to adjust to a more normal social/familial life after slavery, while still being in poverty and having limited/restricted economic opportunities.

I suspect that if a man from a group is less likely to be the real "breadwinner" because he is impoverished, a standard two-parent family will be less likely to be stable or at greater risk of declining in numbers among that group.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,801
USA
My understanding is that the Moynihan report is basically how the term "blaming the victim" was popularized or even how it originated. I'm not saying that that is all that the report is doing, or that Moynihan himself intentionally set out to do that, but I think that simply pointing at single-parent families isn't a sufficient explanation. Especially since the entire trend of single parent families being preponderant could be closely connected to the problems of inequality that African Americans faced in trying to adjust to a more normal social/familial life after slavery, while still being in poverty and having limited/restricted economic opportunities.

I suspect that if a man from a group is less likely to be the real "breadwinner" because he is impoverished, a standard two-parent family will be less likely to be stable or at greater risk of declining in numbers among that group.
No, it was not about blaming the victim, it was one of the first progressive studies of Black Americans done, it was called racist etc simply because the results of the study were negative. But let's be honest, Black Americans at the time had a very poor life and that comes with negatives associated with it. So a sociological study was likely not going to provide positive and uplifting results, nor was it going to use language acceptable to political correctness of the late 20th, early 21st century.

Fact: Black Americans were more likely to be married during Jim Crow than in 2018, when they have massively improved access to basically everything in life, to the point where they are "unfairly" benefiting from affirmative action laws and policies to give them a leg up on others for the simple act of being Black. No one can state that at a time where racism was worse there were Black Americans married, and as things "improved" less got married, as relating to lack of jobs, especially since Black Americans had far fewer job opportunities in the early to mid 60s than they do now.

Something else changed. Culture, that c-word we're not allowed to talk about without being called, like Moynihan, a racist (even when Blacks address it themselves, they are called names equivalent to race traitors).
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,638
Benin City, Nigeria
There will always be inequality, because people are not equal. Equality of outcome is simply just one more of a utopian idea impossible to achieve, only equality of opportunity is possible and it exists right now.

The fix for Black society will not come in the form of more benefits and more govt handouts, it has to do with culture. But nobody will touch that, because as soon as someone brings up something negative, like criminal culture pervasive in black America society, even when brought up by esteemed Black people, they are called racist, Uncle Toms, etc. Its not a matter of throwing more money at the problem, its fixed by first addressing matters in the home, and working up from there. Like the fact that that something like 3/4 of black Americans are born out of wedlock (which has statistically been proven to have MASSIVELY detriment effects on a child's development and future, regardless of race or ethnicity). What legislation or reparations or affirmative action is going to help with this? Because if something as simple as this can't be fixed, then the problem as a whole can't be fixed.
I think the entire issue of ghettos, criminals, excessive single parenthood, etc. are pretty closely tied to the hardships they've faced as a people in America.

I don't think that arguments which drift into the territory of circular reasoning are all that convincing about it being otherwise.

I read about the lawsuit when it came out. I'm not sure you understood what I was referring to about California. If Harvard removed all affirmative action, it might go the way of UC Berkeley. So I'm not sure it's simply an issue of other minorities getting shortchanged due to African Americans at all. It might just be more about keeping a lot of Asians out of Harvard, period, because they've decided (their admissions officials believe, but won't come out and say) that they do not want what they think would be "excessive" numbers of Asians.

Also, the percentage of the university that is "African American" doesn't tell anything about what extent those Asians are really getting shortchanged at, and especially not by actual African Americans, since a lot of those "African Americans" at Harvard are not real "native" African Americans, but immigrants or children of immigrants.
 
Last edited:

Lord Oda Nobunaga

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
5,634
Ontario, Canada
Of course the US needs immigrants, they are the life blood of American commerce and society, it keeps the nation fresh and lively, allowing hard working foreigners to bring strong work ethic, ingenuity, and success to a country that would otherwise stagnate and die. The issue isn't immigration, its unchecked/uncontrolled immigration of refuge class for political purposes (creating voting blocks) at a time where its economically unfeasible to put them on the welfare dole as soon as they make it into the US. But for productive individuals, as long as their arrival doesn't overwhelm the system (like tech industry buying politicians to authorize mass issuing of H-1B visas to hire cheaper employees in lieu of citizens), then its not a problem.

If the black American actor is as good or better than the black from the UK they'll get the part, its as simple as that. If they aren't as capable, they shouldn't get the part.
That is basically what I am referring to. You would make exceptions with H1B and I am drawing the line further ahead. Why do we need to import individuals from other countries to play pretend in the Hollywood hills? We don't.

There are also lots of domestic industries which don't need the competition. So even regular immigration has its limits. I am also demanding higher standards because someone with a degree from some far off country shouldn't be sufficient to gain entry, not even if they can find employment since there are jobs that don't require foreign workers and so there is no point in bringing them in.
 

David Vagamundo

Ad Honorem
Jan 2010
4,439
Atlanta, Georgia USA
There is no black middle class who are benefiting from affirmatvie action. Most ppl getting affirmatvie action are non black DOS. Also whats left of the black middle class is falling through.

Also i brought up immigrants because black immigrants are being used to mask black failure. They typically are better educated and are coming from upper classes. The middle nigerian family in Los Angeles os worth 72,000 that number is 200 dollars for the DOS family in LA.

What reparatons need to look like is something that address the structural issues in black america. Home ownership, business, and access to higher education and trades. Also baby bonds, job garuntees, debt relief since most DOS are in debt or bad credit.
I don't know what you mean by "DOS"

Agree with your second point. That's why I prefer to use the term "African-American" and specify that it does not include every person of the African diaspora living in the US.

Third point:

I don't think you can start with higher education.

The focus should be on K-12 education to give every child a chance to make the most of his or her talents. K-12 education for most African-American children is a failure because the US just doesn't care that much about them. So restructure the schools to focus on the needs of the children rather than those of the teachers.

Today there is so much focus on getting a college education, but for most people--of all demographics--a college education does not do any good unless the student focuses on an area that will help him or her economically. And most students don't. It used to be the case (when around 10% of the people had a college degree) that a college degree was very useful as guaranty that you had the sort of attitude and smarts to contribute to a business organization. I don't think that's true anymore, and college has become so expensive that it's sort of a scam.


Learning trades is a big part of what is needed. You don't need four years of college to learn computer coding, for example, but that is a field with a huge need for people competent to do it.

Also, courses on the basics of entrepreneurism: accounting, budgeting, marketing, .. . . owning a business can be a pathway to prosperity.
 
Last edited:

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,638
Benin City, Nigeria
No, it was not about blaming the victim, it was one of the first progressive studies of Black Americans done, it was called racist etc simply because the results of the study were negative. But let's be honest, Black Americans at the time had a very poor life and that comes with negatives associated with it. So a sociological study was likely not going to provide positive and uplifting results, nor was it going to use language acceptable to political correctness of the late 20th, early 21st century.

Fact: Black Americans were more likely to be married during Jim Crow than in 2018, when they have massively improved access to basically everything in life, to the point where they are "unfairly" benefiting from affirmative action laws and policies to give them a leg up on others for the simple act of being Black. No one can state that at a time where racism was worse there were Black Americans married, and as things "improved" less got married, as relating to lack of jobs, especially since Black Americans had far fewer job opportunities in the early to mid 60s than they do now.

Something else changed. Culture, that c-word we're not allowed to talk about without being called, like Moynihan, a racist (even when Blacks address it themselves, they are called names equivalent to race traitors).
What you've stated here about marriage during Jim Crow is true, but it doesn't tell the whole story.

This paper pretty much debunks the idea that there wasn't also significant single parenthood during Jim Crow as well. There was. They were already starting from a worse position, and I think they were harder hit by the bigger economic challenges they faced.

By the way, it should be noted that while the paper leans toward a pre-slavery "cultural explanation" at the end (with no supporting evidence) for why there was higher single parenthood among African Americans during Jim Crow as well, that is an explanation which really makes no sense. In the parts of Africa that Africans Americans' ancestors originate from, single motherhood was mostly shunned and looked down upon heavily, and it hasn't even been prevalent in significant numbers until recent decades (and even then, it is still not prevalent to an extent that is at all comparable to what exists for African Americans).

To put it simply, Africans in those parts of Africa that the ancestors of African Americans originate from should have a nearly 67% single parent household trend as well if the reasons are simply rooted in some cultural trend that predated slavery (as the author speculates about, but does not state outright, at the end of the paper), but they certainly do not. In fact, in west Africa, only Ghana and Sierra Leone (which had a pretty disruptive civil war) even come close to half of that. For the rest, it's mostly not even close to half of 67%. So when the author mentions at the end of the paper that explanations could be sought either in slavery itself or in pre-slavery cultural trends, it cannot really be the latter.

About your second paragraph here, it should also be noted that single parenthood has been increasing among white Americans and other non-black Americans as well (you can Google this and find many articles on the phenomenon). I think the trend that is affecting more non-black Americans now probably affected African Americans earlier, and probably for the reason that I mentioned before - it was less likely for a two-parent family to form or stay together when there was not a "breadwinner". What would you attribute the increasing numbers of single mothers among white Americans to?
 
Last edited:
Mar 2014
336
Carthage
No, it was not about blaming the victim, it was one of the first progressive studies of Black Americans done, it was called racist etc simply because the results of the study were negative. But let's be honest, Black Americans at the time had a very poor life and that comes with negatives associated with it. So a sociological study was likely not going to provide positive and uplifting results, nor was it going to use language acceptable to political correctness of the late 20th, early 21st century.

Fact: Black Americans were more likely to be married during Jim Crow than in 2018, when they have massively improved access to basically everything in life, to the point where they are "unfairly" benefiting from affirmative action laws and policies to give them a leg up on others for the simple act of being Black. No one can state that at a time where racism was worse there were Black Americans married, and as things "improved" less got married, as relating to lack of jobs, especially since Black Americans had far fewer job opportunities in the early to mid 60s than they do now.

Something else changed. Culture, that c-word we're not allowed to talk about without being called, like Moynihan, a racist (even when Blacks address it themselves, they are called names equivalent to race traitors).

Sorry but the black home broke down due to mass incarceration and the war on drugs, follwed by the welfare system which elimated many black men from being in the home...and this idea marriage made a difference for us is insane, we had higher marriage rates than whites but whites had more money.

This is the same nonsense they promoted in that cnn article that was made by that right wing think tank.
 
Status
Closed