Get E-Mail Updates

Racial Jeopardy and American Politics

During a roundtable chat with a group of emerging young evangelical leaders recently, someone posed the question: “Has America become a post racial society?”

Lisa Sharon Harper
Lisa Sharon Harper

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

Well, we haven’t had a race riot in a while — does that mean race isn’t relevant anymore?

A black president just gave the State of the Union Address. How about that? Does that mean America’s OK with the race thing?

Our nation is a more ethnically diverse nation than it’s ever been. Does that count for anything?

Scholars across disciplines agree that what we think of as “race” literally was invented here in the 17th century to delineate castes within a system of extreme privilege and subjugation.

So, rather than thinking about the dreaded word, “racism,” to answer the question, perhaps it would be more helpful to think about how our society has been “racialized” and then ask if such a racialization still exists or reverberates in today's American culture.

In 1662, the Virginia legislature declared that children born to enslaved women would be slaves “in perpetuity” (a.k.a. “forever”) no matter what the father's race. It was the first law delineating legal difference in status between blacks and whites passed in the New World.

Before the Virginia law's instatement, the status of a person had been based upon the status of the father. This new law made it possible for white slave masters and overseers to rape their female slaves and gain more “chattel” to work their land. In fact, the Virginia law created a new kind of permanent underclass — the black slave — to support a new kind of permanent nobility — the white American.  

Our forbears mirrored England's caste system, with its aristocracy and servant classes where privilege or subjugation was inherited by birthright or circumstance, with one crucial difference. In England, everyone was white, so blood lineage, rather than race, was the delineator.

America's founding fathers believed that in our hallowed land, every man should be the king of his own castle, so-to-speak. Here every man is free and equal and able reap the benefit from the land, its resources, and representative democracy. Every man, that is, except the ones who were not white.

Just seven years after the end of the Revolutionary War, our forbears felt the need to clarify who could enjoy the ultimate privileges and protections of U.S. citizenship. Through the Naturalization Act of 1790, they made it clear. The privilege of citizenship was reserved for “white” people.

Yeah, yeah, Lisa, but that was like 220-something years ago. That doesn’t prove that racialization still exists in America today. Come on! We have a black president.

OK. Let’s play a game. It’s called “Racial Jeopardy.”

1) Name the year race-based slavery ended in the United States. What is 1865?

(Good! That's right. It ended at the conclusion of the Civil War.)


2) Between 1865-1876, this number of African-Americans held elected office.

What is about 1500?

(Yes. Great! African-Americans experienced 11 years of absolute freedom after the Civil War and look what they were able to accomplish with total freedom — right after being enslaved for more than 200 years! There were black senators, representatives, judges, mayors, lieutenant governors — you name it.)


3)This is the year that state and local Jim Crow laws begin to clamp down on southern blacks’ ability to vote, move freely, receive education, or receive equal protection of the law.

What is 1876?

Good.

How many lynchings of black people happened between 1876 and the start of the Civil Rights movement in 1954?

What is 3,438?

(Yes.)


4) Now, this is the year that the Jim Crow system was outlawed in America.

Um ... I don’t know.

(AAAARRRRNNNNKKK! Sorry. The answer we were looking for is, "What is 1964, when the Civil Rights Act was passed, or What is 1965, with the Voting Rights Act.)


5) So, how many years have African-Americans been actually free in the United States?

What is 47?

(Yup.)


Now answer this:

6) What two pieces of legislation are credited as having laid the foundation for the American middle class?

What are the Homestead Act of 1862 and the WWII GI Bill?


7) When the Homestead Act of 1862 was passed how much free land did folks get from the government? And who got it?

What is 160 acres? And who are white folks?

(Uh-huh.)


8) Who benefited from the GI Bill?

Who is everyone?

(AAAARRRRNNNNKKK!  Technically, yes, everyone should have benefited equally from the GI Bill. And by 1956, 7.8 million World War II veterans had received free college education or training and 2.4 million were carrying home loans backed by the Veterans' Administration. But the GI Bill was crafted it in such a way that it made it difficult for African-American GIs to take advantage of the benefits. So, the white middle class far out-paced the development of the African-American middle class.)

9) Has the United States ever sought to repair the damage done by more than two hundred years of institutionalized racialized slavery and one hundred years of racialized Jim Crow law?

What is “no”?

(Correct.)

As a result, the median wealth of white U.S. households in 2009 was $113,149, compared with $5,677 for blacks and $6,325 for Latinos, according to July 2011 data from the Pew Research Center

As a result, at the height of the economic downturn, the poverty rate in the black community was 27 percent, compared with 9.9 percent for whites.

As a result, if you were to lay down a map of the nation's most toxic or polluted land and lay on top of that a map of all the most black, Latino, and Native American communities in the country, you would find a nearly one-to-one correlation.

As a result, the United States incarcerates black men at a rate 6.6-times higher than that of white men.

So, my answer to the question of whether America has become a post-racial society is this: African-Americans have been completely free for just 47 years.

Our nation still has work to do. Race will continue to matter in the United States until we take active, structural steps to counter the more than 300 years of racialized politics and policies — more than 300 years of sin.

Lisa Sharon Harper is the Director of Mobilizing at Sojourners. She is also co-author of Left, Right and Christ: Evangelical Faith in Politics and author of Evangelical Does Not Equal Republican ... or Democrat.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: bklyngirl152

01-26-2012 @ 1:23pm

Fantastic piece.

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 1:24pm

"At the Dark End of the Street" by Danielle McQuire describes the origins of the Civil Rights movement in the protest of the raping of black women by white men. I didn't know about the colonial Virginia law that established this pattern. Excellent article, Lisa!

by: jesse3

01-26-2012 @ 2:24pm

"9) Has the United States ever sought to repair the damage done by more than two hundred years of institutionalized racialized slavery and one hundred years of racialized Jim Crow law?

What is “no”?

(Correct.)

As a result, the median wealth of white U.S. households in 2009 was $113,149, compared with $5,677 for blacks and $6,325 for Latinos, according to July 2011 data from the Pew Research Center. "

--Not sure about the point you are making here. Are you saying that financial reparations should be given to blacks in the US today? Are you also saying that the fact that blacks have not been given reparations accounts for the inequity in household wealth? 

These are obviously controversial points that do not logically follow from the other quite valid and important facts you are stating here. The reparations argument is an odd one for many reasons. As you make clear by the stats you cite above, lack of reparations cannot account for the inequity in household wealth, since latinos have low median wealth, as well. 

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 2:44pm
in reply to: jesse3

Anyone who thinks of “repairing the damage” done in purely monetary terms, whether he or she’s on the pro-reparations or anti-reparations side, isn’t thinking deep enough about the problem. Disparity in wealth is the symptom of a problem (or many problems), but focusing on this disparity as if it’s the problem is problematic.  As Shane Claiborne has noted, a financial gift can be just as much a curse to one person as it can be a blessing to another.

We have a long way to go in repairing the damage done by slavery and discrimination.  Christians must continue to push for renewal, reform and reconciliation.

by: speaker

01-26-2012 @ 8:50pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

I believe her reference to income was pointing to a symptom of the problem not a solution.  Still I think a flat "no" was a bit to harsh (and only a bit mind you).  There have been programs that have small attempts to try repair some of the damage.  The problem that we experienced in Michigan is that as soon as we allowed scholarships based on "ethinicity" to try and increase the amount of black Americans attending colleges in our state, some of the more "clear minded" people in our state, belonging to a political party that will remaing nameless,  labeled this as reverse racism decided to make it illegal.  All of a sudden because a few kids with B- averages couldn't get into UofM they and thier parents decided that it was because they were letting in to many Black people that "had not bussiness being there."  The arguments were usually "I work harder than they do",  "I probably have better grades than they do (because they're black), "It's not fair"  (that I live in a wealthy powerfull white town and have all the privilages of that power, and then some kid who has grown up in a powerless situation with less access to education has a chance at the education that I want, resulting in the possibility that I may have to go my second choice of schools).  yeah this is not a post racial society,  race is very important, it's just that we whites are now feeling threatened that we may not always have all the power and are trying to keep as much as we can. 

by: Sam Hamilton

01-27-2012 @ 4:01pm
in reply to: speaker

I agree that Ms. Harper only used income disparity to highlight a symptom of a problem, and that she could have gone into more detail rather than just a flat "no."  Our country has done a lot to try and ameliorate the effects of slavery and discrimination.  Not as much as you or I might like, but we shouldn't just dismiss everything that's been done.

I disagree with you about the propreity of affirmative action though for several reasons:  We shouldn't engage in racial discrimination; it breeds resentment and makes reconciliation harder; it creates a situation in which people wonder whether a person got someplace because a quota needed to be filled or they're of merit; and it has limited efficacy, while other tools are available that are far more effective and less controversial.

 

by: maggiezee

02-15-2012 @ 11:35pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

 I benefitted from affirmative action. I grew up in a rural town--i.e. a small town surrounded by small farms.  I applied to an elite school because some guy I knew was going there. My interview was with a man who supervised a "small communities program". The school being in an urban area, attended by East Coast residents,  wanted to broaden its scopes to include people from the state who lived in small towns like I did. I did OK in school but I am sure it was far from what was expected of many applicants. The school wanted to take a chance with me and others like me, so they helped balance the scales by admitting me through the progam.  

I never once heard that my seat should have gone to someone more deserving.

No, I don't see that affirmative action is in any way  discrimination one way or the other. It is a way of balancing the scales. Besides, maybe it is the "white" person who is wrongly taking the seat of a more deserving person of color.

by: thevanished

01-28-2012 @ 11:20am
in reply to: speaker

It's a bit more than a few kids not getting into schools with B- averages. Blue collar whites have very limited access to the best schools in the country, which reserve their spots for minorities, legacies, and kids who go to elite schools. If you have an 'A' average and near perfect standardized test scores, but are white and attend a school that has not sent a student to a particular college, you have almost no chance of gaining admission.

 

by: BlueDeacon

01-28-2012 @ 1:50pm
in reply to: thevanished

I went to a diverse high school, and the dropout rate was actually higher for white students than black -- because the white students who left tended to drop out to go to work.  And not simply to support their families, either.  And the reality is that, despite your protestations to the contrary, blue-collar whites still have a better change, all other things being equal, of getting into schools based on their sheer numbers.

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 4:19pm
in reply to: jesse3

Nowhere does Harper use the word "reparations."  However, African-Americans historically have not had the same access to better schools and jobs as the rest of the nation, plus -- important -- they generally don't live among the people that do; therefore, they're not as likely to be a part of the "old-boy" network that others take from granted (thus the need for "affirmative action").

by: jesse3

01-26-2012 @ 4:48pm
in reply to: BlueDeacon

"Nowhere does Harper use the word "reparations."

--No, but she does deny that "the United States ever sought to repair the damage done..." What could this mean if not reparations? An abundance of government programs, educational initiatives, public education, and affirmative action have been in place the last few decades that have provided support to black americans. Do these count as "seeking to repair the damage"? If not, I can think of no other interpretation than specific financial reparations paid out to black americans. If this isn't what she meant, then her point was not made very well. 

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 5:15pm
in reply to: jesse3

An abundance of government programs, educational initiatives, public education, and affirmative action have been in place the last few decades that have provided support to black americans. Do these count as "seeking to repair the damage"?

They do.

If this isn't what she meant, then her point was not made very well.

Because you're seeking to put words in her mouth.

by: Arachne646

01-29-2012 @ 6:16pm
in reply to: BlueDeacon

If you think that a few equal-opportunity programs in your segregated country that has Bantustans in the largest prison system in the world does anything at all to make up for the continuing oppression of just the African-American community in the USA, you are probably a person of European ancestry that has not thought much about racism in society today. Christians should be taking a clear look at what is going on in your country and in mine, and looking at the priviliges our gender, income, and race give us, or we can't know what Paul was talking about when he said we are all one in Christ.

by: BlueDeacon

01-30-2012 @ 1:57pm
in reply to: Arachne646

I am in fact African-American, and whatever segregation we have in our country is no longer by law.  However, one thing the many black radicals -- some of them well-respected college professors -- never understood, but MLK Jr. always did, was that reconciliation is a precursor to justice.  FWIW, I've never been to jail and the few people I know who did go actually were caught doing the crime, so calling our prisons "Bantustans" is greatly overstating things.

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 5:18pm
in reply to: jesse3

One other thing:  Conservatives in the Republican Party won't even issue an official apology for slavery!  Perhaps because of what it may cost them?

by: Shadowman1212

02-09-2012 @ 12:30am
in reply to: BlueDeacon

really??  can you provide evidence of this? I'll bet you can't...triple dare you to try.  I can say that I personally won't apologize, since I did not do it.  I will say it was horrible, and wrong, and I am glad that we have evolved and I can hang out freely with my "American" friends who happen to be a darker shade of brown than me. :-)

by: BlueDeacon

02-16-2012 @ 3:40pm
in reply to: Shadowman1212

Oh, there are several sources for this, most notably from the book "Blinded by Might:  Can the Religious Right Save America?" by Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson, certainly no liberals.  Indeed, the last time it came up in the House of Representatives, then-Speaker Newt Gingrich squelched it.

I will say it was horrible, and wrong, and I am glad that we have evolved and I can hang out freely with my "American" friends who happen to be a darker shade of brown than me. :-)

Not always the case -- I, who am African-American, personally ran into the most racism in a Catholic high school courtesy of the descendents of people who came to this country after slavery.  Then I also had the distinction of being asked to leave an otherwise all-white campus Christian fellowship -- while people from other ethnicities were in leadership.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 2:43pm

I've always wondered what a post-racial society is. What does that mean?

by: agnosticnomore

01-26-2012 @ 6:47pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

In a post racial society we will are be the sades of brown, as we are already.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 7:25pm
in reply to: agnosticnomore

huh?  Can you rephrase that?

 

Also, apparently someone doesn't approve of me even asking this question.  Did I commit a racial faux pas or something?

by: agnosticnomore

01-26-2012 @ 7:41pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

Pardon Me Sam. I should have reread what I posted. I said "In a post racial society we will all be the shades of brown, as we are already."  Explanation of  'are already'. A black person before a black background will appear a shade of brown. A yellow person before a yellow background will appear a shade of brown.
 A red person before a red background will appear a shade of brown, And a white person before a white background will appear a shade of brown. God is no respecter of persons.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 8:45pm
in reply to: agnosticnomore

Ah, thanks.  That makes sense.

by: Kevin_Wayne

01-26-2012 @ 4:09pm

This is a good breakdown of history as the US has expereinced it and how it's efected certain people. Especially enlightening is the part about when the Homestead Act came into place, and points to why landowners are in many cases White. But it doesn't demonstrate IMHO what are the so-called "Structural" problems that exist in post Jim Crow America. There is every reason to believe that the playing field has been leveled enough to make it so that anyone can participate at any level of the Economy today by applying a little elbow grease and a little bootstraps. Harper needs to go much further to make that point, but she doesn't even begin. Hiring preferences and affirmative action may have been needed for awhile, but they are not anymore AFAICS. Also, what about the fact that such preferential treatment has caused resentment and racial DIS-harmony since the Mid 1960's?

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 4:22pm
in reply to: Kevin_Wayne

Hiring preferences and affirmative action may have been needed for awhile, but they are not anymore AFAICS. Also, what about the fact that such preferential treatment has caused resentment and racial DIS-harmony since the Mid 1960's?

This is because the one item that was required to make things work -- actual human contact across racial lines -- couldn't be forced and in some cases was discouraged.  Unfortunately, that came mostly from the black side, especially in the North.

by: Kevin_Wayne

01-26-2012 @ 9:00pm
in reply to: BlueDeacon

Well then, I have to ask what good is it at this point? I guess my real question is, what about now. I think I would have to be shown real proof that institutionalized racism exists to the point that personal effort cannot oversome it. Hard to do with an African-American guy in the White House.

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 11:30pm
in reply to: Kevin_Wayne

I do think we began turning the corner on institutional racism in the late 1990s.

by: golfgirl23

01-27-2012 @ 11:29am
in reply to: Kevin_Wayne

I think white people would like to think that the "playing field has been leveled." I can look around in my town and see that most people living in subsidized or government housing are black. I'm not sure if things were equal that that would be the case along with other circumstances I see. 

When you have bootstraps, it's easy to think that everyone else does as well. Not everyone has bootstraps. Not everyone has the same access to good education, good teachers, mentors, families, etc. Some people don't have hope. If children are involved, they grow up in an environment with no hope. No hope, no desire to attain something better. This happens in all races. In some cases I've seen, where someone has pulled themselves up from an unhopeful situation, they've been helped  because another person showed they care, they invested time and feelings on that person. 

My dad was overlooked for promotions because of EOE, by women and African-Americans. He didn't mind. He said for so long things were not equal. When EOE evened out in his work, he was promoted. But, the equaling out has to happen before it's a level playing field. Personally, I don't want to be hired because I'm a woman; I want to be hired because I'm the right person for the job. I think we're getting closer to that being a reality, but we're not there yet.

 

 

by: Shadowman1212

02-08-2012 @ 10:27pm
in reply to: golfgirl23

I am unclear how promoting someone who may not be as qualified or competent at a job is "equaling things out"...why don't we just focus on everyone has equal opportunity based on their merit and abilities.  The bottom line is some people should not be promoted, including all races.  We shouldn't promote people beyond their capabilites (all races, or colors, whatever you want to label it) period, just to give the illusion that we are trying to "repair" things.  At what point to we determine, what measurements will we use, to decide., "Ok, everything is equal now, every person for themselves!"  When does personal responsibility come into play and self-determination, etc, etc.?

by: BlueDeacon

02-16-2012 @ 3:44pm
in reply to: Shadowman1212

Funny, but it seems as though "people of color" have to be unqualified almost by definition.  The thing is, "unqualified" people have always gotten such jobs or promotions based primarily on "whom they know."

When does personal responsibility come into play and self-determination, etc, etc.?

The reason why we have "affirmative action" is because that's never truly been the case.

by: NicodemusLegend

01-26-2012 @ 4:45pm

Especially in light of that fascinating fact of nearly 1500 elected African-American office-holders between 1865-1876, I'd like to see how those numbers--that is, the number of African-American office-holders--were affected by Jim Crow, and to what degree the proportion (I presume that the straight numbers are less meaningful, given that the size of the country itself has expanded quite a bit since 1876) of African-American elected officials has recovered to those levels in the years since.

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 5:16pm

At the Dark End of the Street: Black Women, Rape, and Resistance--A New History of the Civil Rights Movement from Rosa Parks to the Rise of Black Power (Vintage) [Paperback]

http://atthedarkendofthestreet.com/the-book/reviews/

This book tells the 20th century story that followed from the 1662 Virginia law. History has consequences across many generations.

by: letjusticerolldown

01-26-2012 @ 5:27pm

A series of Jeopardy questions is effective at putting a few harsh and indisputable facts on the table which must be dealt with as they are.


Well done.


And of course, there is much more besides.


I do not think there is any way to understand our nation nor to understand God's desire for Christian mission in/through this nation and skip over a racialized analysis of a racialized nation. But just as it would be a lie to dismiss the analysis--it can be a lie to rely on it too heavily.


Right now we seem stuck on one or more of the following points:


Ignore/dismiss all conversation around race. Apply speech codes. Demonize persons who give a racialized analysis.


Overstate racialized analysis.


Politely sing "We Shall Overcome" twice a year; or replace one episode with "Lift Every Voice and Sing" if someone brings copies of the lyrics.


I think there is an important racial analysis that needs to be present with most issues--but also an acknowledgement that if one stays locked in that 'snapshot' of reality--that the resulting analysis will not lead to increased freedom/justice/shalom.


For example, in Montgomery,where I am at: the City has essentially been a 50-50 black-white town for decades. There is essentially no public issue where race realities are not a slice of the equation. It is impossible for it not to be. And yet, everyday folk have to go to work and make it work (in some way shape and form). Streets and built. Schools are administered. Garbage service is rendered. etc. etc. Black and white leaders, together, manage.


Much of what they battle is a 400+ yr history; yet the analysis of the 400 years does little to help them decide how to balance the school system budget. The analysis does little to downscale the violence, incarceration, and torn families through broad swaths of the City.


Virtually all of us are in some way going to be wrongheaded and/or wronghearted about some element of our racialized world. But for the rest of this day I am committed to being on Christ's pathway--walking with brothers and sisters across racial boundaries--seeking Christ's shalom--believing I need a keen comprehension of this racialized nation--believing Jesus died so this wound would be removed--that I need to make many intentional decisions about this--BUT at the end of the day, it will be God's desired rule breaking into our lives that will answer this problem--not that I will have analyzed it fully and carried out some comprehensive strategy that will right all wrong.

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 6:08pm
in reply to: letjusticerolldown

What are the churches like in Montgomery? Are there any congregations that embody the shalom of Christ in terms of race?

I'm not really aware of any where I live

by: letjusticerolldown

01-26-2012 @ 7:26pm
in reply to: duhsciple

Churches in Montgomery are a mixed bag. I tend to think it best to think of One Church in the city.


Just as I would not expect any single person to fully embody and walk out all that is needed in recards to shalom--I do not expect any single congregation to do so. I think there is a passivity. I think there has always been a passivity. But even with that it is probably a mistake to judge harshly.


There is much traditional religion on the black and white side of the equation.


Dr. King's church was a break-off of the black First Baptist Church which left the white First Baptist Church after the Civil War. So the White First Baptist was somewhat of the mainstay of the Old South. But they are really a wonderful church now with a wonderful pastor and are willing to play a pastoral role for the whole city. But it is still almost all white. The largest Methodist Church in city also has a love for the whole city--but getting peoples to develop different habits of living on Sunday morning is very slow.


The church I attend is almost all black but also has a very city-wide heart and in my mind is best positioned as healer. It was birthed out of an African church and in some ways does not fit into either the traditional black or traditional white structures.


The place in the country where the evangelical church could have significant cultural impact is here. And as I think is often the case (individually and corporately) we think if given the chance we would form the world to be different--but when given the chance we discover we are basically formed in the world's mold--and as much as we complain about it--prefer to remain there versus changing.  Comfortable in our division--not seeing how it ultimately corrupts the Gospel


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 8:14pm
in reply to: letjusticerolldown

thank you for your thoughtful reply!

by: Boustrephon

01-28-2012 @ 1:27am
in reply to: letjusticerolldown

Wonderful. Thank you.

Edit: hmm... Voted down twice in a fairly short time. Not sure why this very short comment received such a response.

by: agnosticnomore

01-28-2012 @ 10:10pm
in reply to: Boustrephon

Sometimes the wrong button gets clicked, sometimes they don't work. Advice. Take the like votes and consider the dislikes as encouragement.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-29-2012 @ 1:48pm
in reply to: agnosticnomore

Agreed.  I got negative votes for thanking you for a reply, as did duhsciple.  I got negative votes for asking a question.  And then people seem to give negative votes to people whose opinions they don't agree with.  If someone disagrees with what another wrote he or she should either write a response or let it lie.  I think negative votes should be reserved for people who are rude, call names, make negative accusations without evidence to back it up, violate the code of conduct, etc.

by: scat

01-29-2012 @ 11:06pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

As a result of a comment by Squeaky on another article, I ran through the remarks here to see if there is a pattern of negatives. The discussion on this article has been totally civil, with one exception, yet there are way too many negative votes.  Someone is perhaps trying to disrupt discussion.  Bottom line is that this is not working and until it is changed the best thing to do is ignore the "votes".  Of I suppose we could counter by giving positive votes whereever there are clearly too many negatives to be meaningful.  I find it amusing if not therapuetic to dish such nonsense back. 

by: BlueDeacon

01-30-2012 @ 11:36am
in reply to: scat

Someone is perhaps trying to disrupt discussion.

This blog has existed for at least eight years, and there have always been a few people trying to disrupt discussion.  That's why I often go off on them here.

by: PeterAttwood

01-26-2012 @ 6:39pm

It's actually much worse than stated.  Jim Crow certainly did not end before 1968, when the Fair Housing Act finally outlawed discrimination in housing, but more pointedly, finally ended the federal government's official policy encouraging housing discrimination.  And many sundown towns existed all over the north and west.  Indeed, Darien Connecticut remained a sundown town into the 1990s.  Jim Loewen's Sundown Towns documents the details, and he has a website following the phenomenon.  They're not yet a thing of the past.

Also, the ingenuity of white supremacy in abolishing slavery, for instance, and then replacing it with other forms of servitude, continues.  Now the "War on Drugs" and other means are used to lock up millions of black men for nothing or close to it, and certainly for things that white people are not locked up for.  And when these millions of racially selected prisoners are making license plates at 18 cents an hour, what has become of the 13th Amendment?

by: letjusticerolldown

01-26-2012 @ 7:40pm
in reply to: PeterAttwood

And Federal Courts had to issue orders into the 70's for states to integrate facilities--leading, for instance, to the establishment of a hoard of private, white, Christian academies--continuing dual systems of education to this day.


That dual system in Montgomery is not maintained out of bad will. It is a system we don't know how to get out of. One of my children attends one of those private academies--except the student population is almost all black. It is owned and run by a white church (neighborhood changed). But it is just one "new face" of a complex system of unequal educational access.

It is so easy to look at other people, places and times and 'sneer' at their injustices and not recognize that most of the time we are caught in cultures of passivity, mixed motives, confusion, systems. We don't just wake up in the morning and face a multiple choice question where there is a clear path of righteousnes


Will we walk together?

by: br3n

01-26-2012 @ 8:32pm

Great piece, and yet I am struck by the complete absence of reference to Native Americans who were also enslaved and denied rights. An excellent novel by Geraldine Brooks entitled Caleb's Crossing gives a short version of relationships between Christians and Native Americans (especially when one wants to attend Harvard).

by: Jim Mathwig

01-26-2012 @ 9:48pm

While this is a sound helpful article the quoting of the median income averages by race is misleading. The white figure is draged up by the super rich giving the the impression that the average white person makes $113,000 while the average black person $5,600 or a difference of 20 times which, of course, is not true. This doesn't change though, the point that economic disparity is appalling and the playing field quite uneven.

by: inapart

01-26-2012 @ 10:00pm

The president has created a hostile racial environment with his racist actions and speeches.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 10:11pm
in reply to: inapart

Can you give some examples of what you're referring to?

by: carr528

01-27-2012 @ 12:38pm
in reply to: inapart

Citation??

by: BlueDeacon

01-27-2012 @ 1:11pm
in reply to: inapart

Ridiculous.

by: golfgirl23

01-27-2012 @ 11:20am

 

I'm ashamed to say I did not know many of the answers. Looking back, there was not a lot of black history taught in my school. Why was it skimmed over? It's as much a part of white history as black. It's all of ours. It's not an excuse, but doesn't that even say something about racial inequality?

I was so excited to see Pres. Obama elected for many reasons. I thought, "wow, we've come a long way." Today, I'm disappointed to say I don't think so. I believe he's had more opposition and non-negotiations because of his color than policies. It's sad if that's true. And though he is black, he's equally white which really says something about how we view tones in the color of people's skins. It's not the man, it's the melanin. 

Regardless of color, I'm glad there is such a strong, educated,  visible family man as our president. I'm glad there is a strong, educated, visible family woman as our first lady. They are a family I really admire and respect because it can't be easy to keep family a top priority when you're in the White House. They give me inspiration; I hope they give inspiration to all families.

(My intention is not to be political.)

 

Thank you for the article. 

 

by: scat

01-27-2012 @ 1:55pm
in reply to: golfgirl23

golf girl -- I agree with what you say. Perhaps it has taken putting a black man in the white house to bring out the more hidden vestiges of racism -- as shown by the ugly remark by inapart. 
Racism is like mold. If you don't get it all, it will rise up again and spread its filth.

For several years I ran a business out in the first ring suburbs. That area was built up in the sixties and populated by people who fled the city because they were afraid of non-blonds moving into their neighborhood. They were so afraid of thier property values going down. They bought these little box ramblers to live in.It was called white flight.

Fast forward 40 years and thier attitudes have not changed.  It was surprising to me how easily they expressed their racism, expecting me and everyone else to agree with them. Since they were customers, I had to bite my tongue to keep from lambasting them. I have lived in an urban neighborhood for years where many of these suburbanites came from.  Strangely enough, my urban neighborhood has become extremely popular and property values have outpaced the suburbs.  Even in this economy, my property has held its value. This is in part due to the cost of gas as well as the disillusionment of suburban living.  A lot of these people that fled in the sixties could not now afford to buy back the houses they abandoned in town.  It just seems like poetic justice to me. 

I agree that it is a joy to have a president who is intelligent, thoughful and blessed with a beautiful family. No  more shooting from the hip cowboy.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: golfgirl23

01-27-2012 @ 11:29am
in reply to: Kevin_Wayne

I think white people would like to think that the "playing field has been leveled." I can look around in my town and see that most people living in subsidized or government housing are black. I'm not sure if things were equal that that would be the case along with other circumstances I see. 

When you have bootstraps, it's easy to think that everyone else does as well. Not everyone has bootstraps. Not everyone has the same access to good education, good teachers, mentors, families, etc. Some people don't have hope. If children are involved, they grow up in an environment with no hope. No hope, no desire to attain something better. This happens in all races. In some cases I've seen, where someone has pulled themselves up from an unhopeful situation, they've been helped  because another person showed they care, they invested time and feelings on that person. 

My dad was overlooked for promotions because of EOE, by women and African-Americans. He didn't mind. He said for so long things were not equal. When EOE evened out in his work, he was promoted. But, the equaling out has to happen before it's a level playing field. Personally, I don't want to be hired because I'm a woman; I want to be hired because I'm the right person for the job. I think we're getting closer to that being a reality, but we're not there yet.

 

 

by: letjusticerolldown

01-26-2012 @ 7:40pm
in reply to: PeterAttwood

And Federal Courts had to issue orders into the 70's for states to integrate facilities--leading, for instance, to the establishment of a hoard of private, white, Christian academies--continuing dual systems of education to this day.


That dual system in Montgomery is not maintained out of bad will. It is a system we don't know how to get out of. One of my children attends one of those private academies--except the student population is almost all black. It is owned and run by a white church (neighborhood changed). But it is just one "new face" of a complex system of unequal educational access.

It is so easy to look at other people, places and times and 'sneer' at their injustices and not recognize that most of the time we are caught in cultures of passivity, mixed motives, confusion, systems. We don't just wake up in the morning and face a multiple choice question where there is a clear path of righteousnes


Will we walk together?

by: scat

01-27-2012 @ 1:55pm
in reply to: golfgirl23

golf girl -- I agree with what you say. Perhaps it has taken putting a black man in the white house to bring out the more hidden vestiges of racism -- as shown by the ugly remark by inapart. 
Racism is like mold. If you don't get it all, it will rise up again and spread its filth.

For several years I ran a business out in the first ring suburbs. That area was built up in the sixties and populated by people who fled the city because they were afraid of non-blonds moving into their neighborhood. They were so afraid of thier property values going down. They bought these little box ramblers to live in.It was called white flight.

Fast forward 40 years and thier attitudes have not changed.  It was surprising to me how easily they expressed their racism, expecting me and everyone else to agree with them. Since they were customers, I had to bite my tongue to keep from lambasting them. I have lived in an urban neighborhood for years where many of these suburbanites came from.  Strangely enough, my urban neighborhood has become extremely popular and property values have outpaced the suburbs.  Even in this economy, my property has held its value. This is in part due to the cost of gas as well as the disillusionment of suburban living.  A lot of these people that fled in the sixties could not now afford to buy back the houses they abandoned in town.  It just seems like poetic justice to me. 

I agree that it is a joy to have a president who is intelligent, thoughful and blessed with a beautiful family. No  more shooting from the hip cowboy.

by: bklyngirl152

01-26-2012 @ 1:23pm

Fantastic piece.

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 1:24pm

"At the Dark End of the Street" by Danielle McQuire describes the origins of the Civil Rights movement in the protest of the raping of black women by white men. I didn't know about the colonial Virginia law that established this pattern. Excellent article, Lisa!

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 4:19pm
in reply to: jesse3

Nowhere does Harper use the word "reparations."  However, African-Americans historically have not had the same access to better schools and jobs as the rest of the nation, plus -- important -- they generally don't live among the people that do; therefore, they're not as likely to be a part of the "old-boy" network that others take from granted (thus the need for "affirmative action").

by: letjusticerolldown

01-26-2012 @ 5:27pm

A series of Jeopardy questions is effective at putting a few harsh and indisputable facts on the table which must be dealt with as they are.


Well done.


And of course, there is much more besides.


I do not think there is any way to understand our nation nor to understand God's desire for Christian mission in/through this nation and skip over a racialized analysis of a racialized nation. But just as it would be a lie to dismiss the analysis--it can be a lie to rely on it too heavily.


Right now we seem stuck on one or more of the following points:


Ignore/dismiss all conversation around race. Apply speech codes. Demonize persons who give a racialized analysis.


Overstate racialized analysis.


Politely sing "We Shall Overcome" twice a year; or replace one episode with "Lift Every Voice and Sing" if someone brings copies of the lyrics.


I think there is an important racial analysis that needs to be present with most issues--but also an acknowledgement that if one stays locked in that 'snapshot' of reality--that the resulting analysis will not lead to increased freedom/justice/shalom.


For example, in Montgomery,where I am at: the City has essentially been a 50-50 black-white town for decades. There is essentially no public issue where race realities are not a slice of the equation. It is impossible for it not to be. And yet, everyday folk have to go to work and make it work (in some way shape and form). Streets and built. Schools are administered. Garbage service is rendered. etc. etc. Black and white leaders, together, manage.


Much of what they battle is a 400+ yr history; yet the analysis of the 400 years does little to help them decide how to balance the school system budget. The analysis does little to downscale the violence, incarceration, and torn families through broad swaths of the City.


Virtually all of us are in some way going to be wrongheaded and/or wronghearted about some element of our racialized world. But for the rest of this day I am committed to being on Christ's pathway--walking with brothers and sisters across racial boundaries--seeking Christ's shalom--believing I need a keen comprehension of this racialized nation--believing Jesus died so this wound would be removed--that I need to make many intentional decisions about this--BUT at the end of the day, it will be God's desired rule breaking into our lives that will answer this problem--not that I will have analyzed it fully and carried out some comprehensive strategy that will right all wrong.

by: letjusticerolldown

01-26-2012 @ 7:26pm
in reply to: duhsciple

Churches in Montgomery are a mixed bag. I tend to think it best to think of One Church in the city.


Just as I would not expect any single person to fully embody and walk out all that is needed in recards to shalom--I do not expect any single congregation to do so. I think there is a passivity. I think there has always been a passivity. But even with that it is probably a mistake to judge harshly.


There is much traditional religion on the black and white side of the equation.


Dr. King's church was a break-off of the black First Baptist Church which left the white First Baptist Church after the Civil War. So the White First Baptist was somewhat of the mainstay of the Old South. But they are really a wonderful church now with a wonderful pastor and are willing to play a pastoral role for the whole city. But it is still almost all white. The largest Methodist Church in city also has a love for the whole city--but getting peoples to develop different habits of living on Sunday morning is very slow.


The church I attend is almost all black but also has a very city-wide heart and in my mind is best positioned as healer. It was birthed out of an African church and in some ways does not fit into either the traditional black or traditional white structures.


The place in the country where the evangelical church could have significant cultural impact is here. And as I think is often the case (individually and corporately) we think if given the chance we would form the world to be different--but when given the chance we discover we are basically formed in the world's mold--and as much as we complain about it--prefer to remain there versus changing.  Comfortable in our division--not seeing how it ultimately corrupts the Gospel


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

by: Jim Mathwig

01-26-2012 @ 9:48pm

While this is a sound helpful article the quoting of the median income averages by race is misleading. The white figure is draged up by the super rich giving the the impression that the average white person makes $113,000 while the average black person $5,600 or a difference of 20 times which, of course, is not true. This doesn't change though, the point that economic disparity is appalling and the playing field quite uneven.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 10:11pm
in reply to: inapart

Can you give some examples of what you're referring to?

by: golfgirl23

01-27-2012 @ 11:20am

 

I'm ashamed to say I did not know many of the answers. Looking back, there was not a lot of black history taught in my school. Why was it skimmed over? It's as much a part of white history as black. It's all of ours. It's not an excuse, but doesn't that even say something about racial inequality?

I was so excited to see Pres. Obama elected for many reasons. I thought, "wow, we've come a long way." Today, I'm disappointed to say I don't think so. I believe he's had more opposition and non-negotiations because of his color than policies. It's sad if that's true. And though he is black, he's equally white which really says something about how we view tones in the color of people's skins. It's not the man, it's the melanin. 

Regardless of color, I'm glad there is such a strong, educated,  visible family man as our president. I'm glad there is a strong, educated, visible family woman as our first lady. They are a family I really admire and respect because it can't be easy to keep family a top priority when you're in the White House. They give me inspiration; I hope they give inspiration to all families.

(My intention is not to be political.)

 

Thank you for the article. 

 

by: Kathleen Alexander

01-27-2012 @ 12:02pm

Timely piece with telling facts -- "What is 47" for the number of years African-Americans have actually been free in the U.S.  Another relevant read is the New Yorker article (1/30/12) by Adam Gopnik on "The Caging of America".  ". ..mass incarceration on a scale almost unexampled in human history is a fundametnal fact of our country today--perhaps the fundamental fact, as slavary was the fundamental fact of 1850.  In truth, there are more black men in the grip of the criminal-justice system--in prison, on probation or on parole--than were in slavery then.  Over all, there are now moe people under "correctional supervision" in America--more than 6 million--than were in the Gulag Archipelago under Stalin at its height."

Also, listen to Michelle Alexander talk about her new book "The New Jim Crow:  Mass Incarceration" aired on NPR a week ago.

We need to reintroduce vocational training in high schools for those not college bound.

 

 

 

by: agnosticnomore

01-28-2012 @ 12:02pm

What is most important in our world today is to nurture the potential of all. Humanity is being challenged to get beyond our nationalism and individualism. How best to accomplish this is a great challenge. First we recognize that there is only one life source in the universe and we are all participating in it. We must move beyond competition to co-operation.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 2:43pm

I've always wondered what a post-racial society is. What does that mean?

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 2:44pm
in reply to: jesse3

Anyone who thinks of “repairing the damage” done in purely monetary terms, whether he or she’s on the pro-reparations or anti-reparations side, isn’t thinking deep enough about the problem. Disparity in wealth is the symptom of a problem (or many problems), but focusing on this disparity as if it’s the problem is problematic.  As Shane Claiborne has noted, a financial gift can be just as much a curse to one person as it can be a blessing to another.

We have a long way to go in repairing the damage done by slavery and discrimination.  Christians must continue to push for renewal, reform and reconciliation.

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 5:15pm
in reply to: jesse3

An abundance of government programs, educational initiatives, public education, and affirmative action have been in place the last few decades that have provided support to black americans. Do these count as "seeking to repair the damage"?

They do.

If this isn't what she meant, then her point was not made very well.

Because you're seeking to put words in her mouth.

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 5:16pm

At the Dark End of the Street: Black Women, Rape, and Resistance--A New History of the Civil Rights Movement from Rosa Parks to the Rise of Black Power (Vintage) [Paperback]

http://atthedarkendofthestreet.com/the-book/reviews/

This book tells the 20th century story that followed from the 1662 Virginia law. History has consequences across many generations.

by: agnosticnomore

01-26-2012 @ 6:47pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

In a post racial society we will are be the sades of brown, as we are already.

by: agnosticnomore

01-26-2012 @ 7:41pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

Pardon Me Sam. I should have reread what I posted. I said "In a post racial society we will all be the shades of brown, as we are already."  Explanation of  'are already'. A black person before a black background will appear a shade of brown. A yellow person before a yellow background will appear a shade of brown.
 A red person before a red background will appear a shade of brown, And a white person before a white background will appear a shade of brown. God is no respecter of persons.

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 8:14pm
in reply to: letjusticerolldown

thank you for your thoughtful reply!

by: kshimer

01-27-2012 @ 11:36am

This post-racial society you write about, particularly from the perspective of the election of America's first black president, is addressed in the book Audacity of Faith: Christian Leaders Reflect on the Election of Barack Obama. Preachers, academics, and authors crossing racial, political and denominational lines answered these questions as posed by editor Marvin McMickle:



  1. Does a black man in the White House signify our arrival in the Promised Land—or do we still have a long way to go in pursuit of liberty and justice for all?

  2. To what extent might Barack Obama’s election represent a fulfillment of Martin Luther King’s dream?

Naturally their perspectives vary, and it's fascinating reading! 


http://www.judsonpress.com/product.cfm?product_id=13518

by: scat

01-27-2012 @ 2:01pm
in reply to: Kathleen Alexander

Kathleen -- I agree that education is a key element to solving this problem, as well as our economic problems. But it needs to start much earlier, while children are still developing their habits and skills. High school is too late to make fundamental changes.  What we need are more children of color going to college and becoming skilled professionals. 

by: Troy

01-27-2012 @ 2:22pm

Lisa, There seems to me a tension between your claims about race and the present-day policies you seem to be supporting. At the beginning of the piece you say that the notion of race was a 17th century invention used to perpetuate injustice; but if I understand correctly the kinds of things the government needs to do about present-day problems, many would involve an emphasis of race. I realize that you haven't given us detailed policy prescriptions here, but measures such as reparations, affirmative action, and the like are all irreducibly tied to special treatment for certain races, albeit for allegedly altruistic motives. How can one at the same time hold that race is not real but that some races ought to be treated differently by the state?

One might reply that we can use (self-identified?) race as a proxy for who has been hurt by historical injustice and who needs more of our help now. But it seems to me that, in addition to being a *very* inexact proxy (the blacks who are already well enough off to benefit from affirmative action, for example, are probably not the ones who most need help), this emphasis on race will have many negative effects as well -- for example, whites will tend to resent affirmative action measures, and blacks will be more likely to blame problems on whites and not confront problems within the African-American community.

This isn't to say that the state can't do anything to combat racism, but it seems to me that the measures it can take that would actually be effective and not cause more problems are primarily negative -- e.g., ending or reforming policies that have actively discriminated against blacks, something many people claim about the War on Drugs, for instance.

by: letjusticerolldown

01-27-2012 @ 3:34pm

Another frame of reference (just a different 'snapshot') is that Obama clearly symbolizes a post-racial world. There are still lots of daily newspapers--but we are in a post-newspaper world. Part of the reason Obama's election does not feel like it dramatically shifted the black-white reality of the US journey is that while we waited for 400 years for that shift--the world shifted under us. It is possible that just as we lifted up race as an idol--we also lifted up "racial justice" as a counter idol. And in God's grace (or judgement--or both)just shifted the ground. National boundaries, racial boundaries, ethnic boundaries and religious boundaries are not what they were 50 years ago. The election of Obama did nothing. The election of Obama represents the world has moved. Our attention needs to be on this world that has moved and God's activity within it. That does not displace the historical journey but if we don't see things as they are we will paralyze ourselves at some point in a frozen memory.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-27-2012 @ 4:01pm
in reply to: speaker

I agree that Ms. Harper only used income disparity to highlight a symptom of a problem, and that she could have gone into more detail rather than just a flat "no."  Our country has done a lot to try and ameliorate the effects of slavery and discrimination.  Not as much as you or I might like, but we shouldn't just dismiss everything that's been done.

I disagree with you about the propreity of affirmative action though for several reasons:  We shouldn't engage in racial discrimination; it breeds resentment and makes reconciliation harder; it creates a situation in which people wonder whether a person got someplace because a quota needed to be filled or they're of merit; and it has limited efficacy, while other tools are available that are far more effective and less controversial.

 

by: Boustrephon

01-28-2012 @ 1:27am
in reply to: letjusticerolldown

Wonderful. Thank you.

Edit: hmm... Voted down twice in a fairly short time. Not sure why this very short comment received such a response.

by: agnosticnomore

01-28-2012 @ 10:10pm
in reply to: Boustrephon

Sometimes the wrong button gets clicked, sometimes they don't work. Advice. Take the like votes and consider the dislikes as encouragement.

by: Arachne646

02-08-2012 @ 11:35am
in reply to: Wayne in Woodstock

That's kind of irrelevant, since in the South, the parties have pretty much exchanged names and the conservative Democratic Party switched nationally (and pretty much locally) to the Republican Party thanks to Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy" (continued by Reagan) of appealing to "tough on crime", and  "cut welfare" policies worded in ways like "welfare queens" to appeal to racist fears of voters in both the North and South. It worked, and Republicans are still intimating that food stamps are a program for African-Americans today. Like the country as a whole, food stamp users are mostly white. They are mostly the working poor, too.


I agree with your point that neither party represents a moral alternative--they're both political parties. JFK only supported Civil Rights laws with National Guardsmen because of the bad publicity, foreign and domestic, that non-violent Civil Rights demonstrators being violently attacked by police and civilians provided on TV and film. Recent politics has not shown either Party to be morally superior. God is a non-affiliated authority.

by: Shadowman1212

02-09-2012 @ 12:30am
in reply to: BlueDeacon

really??  can you provide evidence of this? I'll bet you can't...triple dare you to try.  I can say that I personally won't apologize, since I did not do it.  I will say it was horrible, and wrong, and I am glad that we have evolved and I can hang out freely with my "American" friends who happen to be a darker shade of brown than me. :-)

by: Shadowman1212

02-09-2012 @ 3:20am
in reply to: golfgirl23

Are you kidding me?   I really think we have not advanced, because some think if you disagree with a person of color you are a racist or prejudiced.  Ridiculous. How about he is wrong...have you considered that?  I want a leader, not an educated family man....you actually have to use the education or actually have experience in order to get results...talking doesn't cut it. 

by: Kevin_Wayne

01-26-2012 @ 4:09pm

This is a good breakdown of history as the US has expereinced it and how it's efected certain people. Especially enlightening is the part about when the Homestead Act came into place, and points to why landowners are in many cases White. But it doesn't demonstrate IMHO what are the so-called "Structural" problems that exist in post Jim Crow America. There is every reason to believe that the playing field has been leveled enough to make it so that anyone can participate at any level of the Economy today by applying a little elbow grease and a little bootstraps. Harper needs to go much further to make that point, but she doesn't even begin. Hiring preferences and affirmative action may have been needed for awhile, but they are not anymore AFAICS. Also, what about the fact that such preferential treatment has caused resentment and racial DIS-harmony since the Mid 1960's?

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 4:22pm
in reply to: Kevin_Wayne

Hiring preferences and affirmative action may have been needed for awhile, but they are not anymore AFAICS. Also, what about the fact that such preferential treatment has caused resentment and racial DIS-harmony since the Mid 1960's?

This is because the one item that was required to make things work -- actual human contact across racial lines -- couldn't be forced and in some cases was discouraged.  Unfortunately, that came mostly from the black side, especially in the North.

by: NicodemusLegend

01-26-2012 @ 4:45pm

Especially in light of that fascinating fact of nearly 1500 elected African-American office-holders between 1865-1876, I'd like to see how those numbers--that is, the number of African-American office-holders--were affected by Jim Crow, and to what degree the proportion (I presume that the straight numbers are less meaningful, given that the size of the country itself has expanded quite a bit since 1876) of African-American elected officials has recovered to those levels in the years since.

by: duhsciple

01-26-2012 @ 6:08pm
in reply to: letjusticerolldown

What are the churches like in Montgomery? Are there any congregations that embody the shalom of Christ in terms of race?

I'm not really aware of any where I live

by: PeterAttwood

01-26-2012 @ 6:39pm

It's actually much worse than stated.  Jim Crow certainly did not end before 1968, when the Fair Housing Act finally outlawed discrimination in housing, but more pointedly, finally ended the federal government's official policy encouraging housing discrimination.  And many sundown towns existed all over the north and west.  Indeed, Darien Connecticut remained a sundown town into the 1990s.  Jim Loewen's Sundown Towns documents the details, and he has a website following the phenomenon.  They're not yet a thing of the past.

Also, the ingenuity of white supremacy in abolishing slavery, for instance, and then replacing it with other forms of servitude, continues.  Now the "War on Drugs" and other means are used to lock up millions of black men for nothing or close to it, and certainly for things that white people are not locked up for.  And when these millions of racially selected prisoners are making license plates at 18 cents an hour, what has become of the 13th Amendment?

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 7:25pm
in reply to: agnosticnomore

huh?  Can you rephrase that?

 

Also, apparently someone doesn't approve of me even asking this question.  Did I commit a racial faux pas or something?

by: Sam Hamilton

01-26-2012 @ 8:45pm
in reply to: agnosticnomore

Ah, thanks.  That makes sense.

by: speaker

01-26-2012 @ 8:50pm
in reply to: Sam Hamilton

I believe her reference to income was pointing to a symptom of the problem not a solution.  Still I think a flat "no" was a bit to harsh (and only a bit mind you).  There have been programs that have small attempts to try repair some of the damage.  The problem that we experienced in Michigan is that as soon as we allowed scholarships based on "ethinicity" to try and increase the amount of black Americans attending colleges in our state, some of the more "clear minded" people in our state, belonging to a political party that will remaing nameless,  labeled this as reverse racism decided to make it illegal.  All of a sudden because a few kids with B- averages couldn't get into UofM they and thier parents decided that it was because they were letting in to many Black people that "had not bussiness being there."  The arguments were usually "I work harder than they do",  "I probably have better grades than they do (because they're black), "It's not fair"  (that I live in a wealthy powerfull white town and have all the privilages of that power, and then some kid who has grown up in a powerless situation with less access to education has a chance at the education that I want, resulting in the possibility that I may have to go my second choice of schools).  yeah this is not a post racial society,  race is very important, it's just that we whites are now feeling threatened that we may not always have all the power and are trying to keep as much as we can. 

by: BlueDeacon

01-26-2012 @ 11:30pm
in reply to: Kevin_Wayne

I do think we began turning the corner on institutional racism in the late 1990s.

by: carr528

01-27-2012 @ 12:38pm
in reply to: inapart

Citation??

by: BlueDeacon

01-27-2012 @ 1:11pm
in reply to: inapart

Ridiculous.

by: thevanished

01-28-2012 @ 11:20am
in reply to: speaker

It's a bit more than a few kids not getting into schools with B- averages. Blue collar whites have very limited access to the best schools in the country, which reserve their spots for minorities, legacies, and kids who go to elite schools. If you have an 'A' average and near perfect standardized test scores, but are white and attend a school that has not sent a student to a particular college, you have almost no chance of gaining admission.

 

by: BlueDeacon

01-28-2012 @ 1:50pm
in reply to: thevanished

I went to a diverse high school, and the dropout rate was actually higher for white students than black -- because the white students who left tended to drop out to go to work.  And not simply to support their families, either.  And the reality is that, despite your protestations to the contrary, blue-collar whites still have a better change, all other things being equal, of getting into schools based on their sheer numbers.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-29-2012 @ 1:48pm
in reply to: agnosticnomore

Agreed.  I got negative votes for thanking you for a reply, as did duhsciple.  I got negative votes for asking a question.  And then people seem to give negative votes to people whose opinions they don't agree with.  If someone disagrees with what another wrote he or she should either write a response or let it lie.  I think negative votes should be reserved for people who are rude, call names, make negative accusations without evidence to back it up, violate the code of conduct, etc.

by: Arachne646

01-29-2012 @ 6:16pm
in reply to: BlueDeacon

If you think that a few equal-opportunity programs in your segregated country that has Bantustans in the largest prison system in the world does anything at all to make up for the continuing oppression of just the African-American community in the USA, you are probably a person of European ancestry that has not thought much about racism in society today. Christians should be taking a clear look at what is going on in your country and in mine, and looking at the priviliges our gender, income, and race give us, or we can't know what Paul was talking about when he said we are all one in Christ.

by: BlueDeacon

01-30-2012 @ 11:36am
in reply to: scat

Someone is perhaps trying to disrupt discussion.

This blog has existed for at least eight years, and there have always been a few people trying to disrupt discussion.  That's why I often go off on them here.

by: BlueDeacon

01-30-2012 @ 1:57pm
in reply to: Arachne646

I am in fact African-American, and whatever segregation we have in our country is no longer by law.  However, one thing the many black radicals -- some of them well-respected college professors -- never understood, but MLK Jr. always did, was that reconciliation is a precursor to justice.  FWIW, I've never been to jail and the few people I know who did go actually were caught doing the crime, so calling our prisons "Bantustans" is greatly overstating things.

by: Arachne646

02-02-2012 @ 12:09pm
in reply to: letjusticerolldown

Barak Obama's election as President of the United States does signal a dramatic shift in the black/white reality in the US. The fact that an African American could be elected President is very significant, and God's grace moved people to see that it was reasonable. That does not mean society is not racist in how it works, though, thankfully, being racist is seen as unreasoning and distasteful to almost everyone. Systems in and of themselves can be racist, without malice or conscious racism from any individual, and some easy places to see it are in education, the drastically different effects of the economic collapse, and most of all, in the criminal justice system.


To say that racism is alive and well in society today is not to attack white people, or to say that white people where I live are less racist than somewhere else. Racist systems exist particularly well when they are maintained by people who aren't particularly malicious or racist, "colourblind", and who would like to see a "post-racial" world. We've made lots of progress, but we're far from equality. I don't think letjusticerolldown is suggesting we just concentrate on all the good that God has inspired toward equality and harmony, and anything that's not fair will just work itself out in time. Without forgetting all the progress that's been made, let's continue to see injustice for what it is, and tell the truth in love, no matter what the cost.

by: Shadowman1212

02-08-2012 @ 10:27pm
in reply to: golfgirl23

I am unclear how promoting someone who may not be as qualified or competent at a job is "equaling things out"...why don't we just focus on everyone has equal opportunity based on their merit and abilities.  The bottom line is some people should not be promoted, including all races.  We shouldn't promote people beyond their capabilites (all races, or colors, whatever you want to label it) period, just to give the illusion that we are trying to "repair" things.  At what point to we determine, what measurements will we use, to decide., "Ok, everything is equal now, every person for themselves!"  When does personal responsibility come into play and self-determination, etc, etc.?

by: Shadowman1212

02-09-2012 @ 3:28am

Your claims below are completely and utterly false. Please do your research and back up your claims. You provide no references or statistics. Since you made these claims...ownus on you.

"7) When the Homestead Act of 1862 was passed how much free land did folks get from the government? And who got it?

What is 160 acres? And who are white folks?

(Uh-huh.)

8) Who benefited from the GI Bill?

Who is everyone?

(AAAARRRRNNNNKKK! Technically, yes, everyone should have benefited equally from the GI Bill. And by 1956, 7.8 million World War II veterans had received free college education or training and 2.4 million were carrying home loans backed by the Veterans' Administration. But the GI Bill was crafted it in such a way that it made it difficult for African-American GIs to take advantage of the benefits. So, the white middle class far out-paced the development of the African-American middle class.)
"