GS, i don't know if you've already posted it, but how would you summarize (if it is even possible to do so, obviously it's a complex topic that does not beget a simple answer) your position on the whole "black people family values problem" (for lack of a more graceful term)? would you say it's wholly economic?
yes it's a super complex topic but i'll try
i would say that there is no "family values problem" and that it's much harder to maintain a committed relationship when facing significant social and economic stressors. for someone to acknowledge the reality of institutional racism, but suggest that black men need to be educated on the value of family, is textbook victim blaming. to say that, yes, there are significant barriers to success, but that it's their fault for not achieving a rate similar to white families, is doublethink. no one should HAVE to overcome the barriers which are easily identifiable and prevalent, but also quite fixable. it's great that people have done it, but to expect it of them? uhhh no
bear with me as i now attempt to make a football analogy. holding happens on (virtually) every play (much like drug use rates are very similar across races). for the sake of simplicity, let's say 2/3 of the league averages one holding penalty per game. meanwhile the rest of the league average as much as 10 holding penalties per game (this is reflective of the 10-1 racial disparity in the rate of convictions for drug crimes here in north carolina). zod and madhatter (iirc) only cared to ask if they were actually holding (are they committing the crimes or are the gestapo dragging them from their homes?). i argue that it is irrelevant; there is no reason why 1/3 of the league is getting penalized for holding 10 times for every 1 time that the majority is called for holding. it harms the performance of each "minority" team in a number of ways. drives stall, the offense scores less, the defense is on the field more, the defense gives up more points out of fatigue and simple statistical probability. while i would say "hey these teams are getting fuged by the officials on a weekly basis, these other teams are doing the exact same thing with much less repercussion," others itt would argue "hey it's still possible that a team that's perpetually fuged by the officials can win a game so if they aren't in playoff contention like the privileged teams, they clearly need to be educated on the value of not getting so many penalties so that they too can achieve a rate of 1 hold per game"
now consider the long-term, far reaching effects of incarceration. not only are "marriageable men" removed from the population; sons lose fathers, girlfriends/wives lose boyfriends/husbands, parents lose children; these are all significant sources of stress for those on the outside. additionally, research shows that non-violent offenders have an increasing likelihood of committing violent and/or property crime upon release, once again removing a "marriageable man", a father, a son, from the population.
say a child grows up in a single-parent household; i believe it's been posted in this thread that growing up in such a household increases the likelihood that they too will either head a single-parent household OR be a parent that's absent in a single-parent household. when black people are disproportionately arrested, convicted, and sentenced for the same crimes as white people, this indicates a significant social barrier to a single-parent home rate similar to that of white ppl. at that point it is really, really fuging dumb to start spamming statistics without interpreting them beyond "welp maybe they just need to be taught how to be good like us." i mean goddamn there's some real "white man's burden" poo going down in this thread, yet only KT's been banned.
anyway the economic uncertainty stuff has been posted repeatedly through the thread so i won't go into detail, other than to say that economic uncertainty for black ppl goes hand-in-hand with social issues. take for instance the study finding that black people with no record have received fewer call-backs on job applications than white convicts; this ISN'T an economic problem, it is a social problem. that social problem contributes directly to feelings of economic uncertainty, which in turn discourages marriage.
now consider the impact economic uncertainty has on marriage (from the study zod fuging posted), and attempt to reconcile that with zod's call for reducing or eliminating welfare. i've heard the saying which (paraphrased) goes "never attribute to malice, that which can be explained by ignorance," but this is some sinister poo.
anyway i know this response is all over the place because it's such a complex topic, and there are other sociological factors that could probably be included in this, but i find the easiest ones for ppl outside of the field to understand and possibly relate to are the significant disparities within the justice system and in the workplace. they're just so visible. now, to answer your question: no, it is not wholly economic. economic justice and social justice go hand-in-hand, and you can't have one without the other.
i wholeheartedly agree with that (teenage pregnancy is a problem). my issue is with the use of the 70% statistic. it is certainly a meaningful statistic, but not for the reason that it was posted. it is dependent on multiple factors, but a lack of value for family isn't one of them. there is a reason why certain groups of people are plagued by teenage pregnancy and broken homes, and the implication that they need to be educated is problematic.
e: relevant to the OP, it isn't "making excuses" to say that black people face significant obstacles that are structurally ingrained in our society. suggesting that the bulk of their problems can be explained away with the simple need to "educate" them on the "value of family" reeks of victim blaming.
You're having a really hard time explaining yourself, huh?
What are the hipsters down at the local college coffee house poerty reading going to think about this? C'mon, gospodin, use that Expository Writing class experience and sink your teeth into this one, buddy.
you've completely ignored the literature. while zod gives the impression that he is at least interested in understanding, whether or not he actually does, you are willfully ignorant. you've argued against a straw man for 2 pages now because you are entirely uninterested in any answer to this issue that isn't "black people are just irresponsible when compared to white people"
Actually I don't think white people do a great job of this either, but since you're clearly late night trolling, I'm not sure that really even matters to you. The reason blacks and hispanics routinely have lower testing and higher crime and recidivism rates is directly attributable to the 72% number Zod referenced earlier about children in these communities growing up in homes without a father.
it's amazing how you libertarians come so close to the truth, then totally fug it up with unfounded bullshit. i'd suggest reading The New Jim Crow ( http://www.amazon.co...he new jim crow ). they also offer an audio edition, if reading is challenging for you. however, you appear to be quite the expert on the subject so if you could, please clear up the following items:
1). explain the relationship between "homes without a father" and the fact that black youths face harsher treatment and sentencing than white youths for committing the exact same crimes.
The NCCD finds that black youth are more likely than white youth to be formally charged and sentenced to out-of-home placement for the same offense. For example, 50 percent of drug cases involving white youth result in formal processing, while more than 75 percent of drug cases involving black youth result in formal processing.
Multiple studies show that black youth are given more restrictive dispositions than
white youth, even when they have committed the same offense and have the same
2). explain the relationship between "homes without a father" and, say, the blatantly discriminatory stop and frisk tactics in NY (disproportionately affecting millions of innocent minorities):
Only 11 percent of stops in 2011 were based on a description of a violent crime suspect. On the other hand, from 2002 to 2011, black and Latino residents made up close to 90 percent of people stopped, and about 88 percent of stops – more than 3.8 million – were of innocent New Yorkers. Even in neighborhoods that are predominantly white, black and Latino New Yorkers face the disproportionate brunt. For example, in 2011, Black and Latino New Yorkers made up 24 percent of the population in Park Slope, but 79 percent of stops. This, on its face, is discriminatory.
the best part is that white people who were stopped were actually MORE LIKELY to be arrested for committing a crime, yet the nypd continued to profile minorities (probably because they grew up without a father)
3). explain the relationship between "homes without a father" and the fact that the war on drugs has disproportionately targeted minorities since its inception; the fact that black ppl are far more likely to be convicted of drug crimes than white ppl. i guess it's all because daddy wasn't there
Apart from crowding prisons, one result is a devastating impact on the lives of black men: they are nearly 12 times as likely to be imprisoned for drug convictions as adult white men, according to the Human Rights Watch report.
Two-thirds of those arrested for drug violations in 2006 were white and 33 percent were black, although blacks made up 12.8 percent of the population, F.B.I. data show.
why is it that white and black people use drugs at the same rate, but black men (AKA BLACK FATHERS) "enter North Carolina state prisons on drug charges at ten times the rate of white men"? (http://criminaljusti...cialdisparities). if only they had (white) fathers
and why is it that black defendants who are convicted of capital offenses are sentenced to death at much higher rates than white people? i guess not having a father makes them super-duper guilty and worthy of death, rather than JUST guilty and worthy of life imprisonment. (http://www.deathpena...ides#TheRawData)
4. explain the relationship between "homes without a father" and the fact that employers don't fuging call black applicants back
Devah Pager, a sociologist at Princeton University, conducted groundbreaking research in Wisconsin and found that black men were less likely to be called back on a job application than white men with a criminal record. The statistics went like this:
Job call-backs: White non-criminal: 34% White criminal: 17%
Black non-criminal: 14% Black criminal: 5%
this librul princeton ivory tower nerd found that white ppl with a criminal record were more likely to be called back on a job application than black ppl with no criminal record (btw this study controlled for education and experience). goddamn those awful black fathers for, uh, something i guess idk
now i know you don't need no book learnin so you're free to ignore the data; i'm mostly interested in how you can connect "homes without a father" with employers that don't call black people back and courts that apply much harsher punishments for black people and cops that brazenly profile black people despite the fact that white people offend at similar (or in some cases, greater) rates
KT, you're going to have to acknowledge the average Black Male is the problem in Illinois or Zod is not going to stop calling you out.
You know, I'm afraid the Black man does not love his children.
this is it in a nutshell. some people sure do like to point at things like broken homes or incarceration rates without ever stopping to consider things like a fundamentally racist justice system or disproportionate poverty rates or the shitty state of the social safety net. it's an insidious form of victim blaming that needs to be identified and mocked; however that appears to be ban-worthy around here
i also like how some libertarians will quickly tell you that american drug policy is racist and that the war on drugs could perhaps best be described as a war on minorities (which for the most part is in fact true), but will also applaud ppl who will stand before a group of black people and tell them to "stop making excuses." doublethink is a necessary component of reactionary thought
I am a Marine. This picture is ridiculous beyond belief. Very degrading. I am stunned that he would allow this to happen. If you are so worried about the rain, move your press conference indoors.
very degrading indeed
this reminds me of that time when you guys were sent to fight an illegal war under false pretenses, killing at least 100,000 iraqi civilians in the process. if you've managed to get over that, i think you'll be able to handle a picture of a marine holding an umbrella for the president