A
adamhovey1988
Guest
Or any family.
- Status
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I think a better title to the article in the OP might have been “To combat inequality, try reviving the black family.” Obviously reviving the black family isn’t going to do anything to change racist hearts. On the other hand, reviving the black family would quite likely reduce inequality. But as others have noted, the article gives no roadmap for how to do either.
W
Welshrabbit
Guest
Agreed. Seems strange to totally conflate “racism” and “inequality,” although there certainly are correlations.
R
RobertAdams
Guest
It is a challenge to “revive the black family” when society discriminates against and incarcerates the black family to its breaking point then uses the outcome as “proof” that it was the fault of black families all along.
R
RobertAdams
Guest
I am aware of who said it and do not think it was necessarily racist in the context of the address in which it was given, but is certainly racist when quoted out of context.
However, I am glad to see the point made that prominent African American activists have been confronting crime for decades, as elsewhere on this board the false claim that activists don’t really care about black lives because they dont talk about crime has been tossed out there a few times.
However, I am glad to see the point made that prominent African American activists have been confronting crime for decades, as elsewhere on this board the false claim that activists don’t really care about black lives because they dont talk about crime has been tossed out there a few times.
blackforest
Well-known member
I agree. His very premise blames Black Americans for the racism against them.
Also bear in mind that crime rates are based on convictions. For a number of crimes, African-Americans are convicted at higher rates than their white counterparts. A quick search engine tour on racial disparities and marijuana convictions will elucidate this issue. Conviction is a subjective process vulnerable to racist biases.
1
1Lord1Faith
Guest
I didn’t read the article, but from the discussion I’ve read here, I agree with your statement.
Although I’m not sure why the term racism is being used here, not in your post, but in the article. I think a more appropriate term to use would be stereotype.
Last edited:
blackforest
Well-known member
Maybe. But even then, I think stereotypers are responsible for the stereotyping, not the stereotyped. Let’s all say that again after three glasses of wine . . . :crazy_face:
You absolutely have to understand intersectionality, to understand what is going on in this country today. This is the Democratic Party’s bread and butter. They do an outstanding job of corralling together all the “identity groups”, getting them to support one another’s agendas and concerns, and mashing this all together into “progressivism”. And as anyone with an elementary-school command of math can tell you, when you add together enough people to get 51 percent of the vote, you win elections.
F
Freddy
Guest
Excellent article here about the woman who first coined the term and what it actually means - as opposed to the way that it’s apparently being used these days: Intersectionality, explained: meet Kimberlé Crenshaw, who coined the term - Vox
P
phil19034
Guest
This is something that Booker T. Washington often argued. His argument in the late 1800s is that while some people truly are racist, there really is little anyone can do to change their minds except by living a good life.catholiclala:
And he doesn’t explain the title. How is ensuring stable black families going to counter racism?
‘I’m not going to hire her because she’s black’.
‘But she’s from a stable family’.
'Oh, my bad. Call her back. I’m only racist against black people from unstable families.
His argument was that classism, not racism, is the main underlying factor in America. He argued that you can’t control what racists think. But you can control how hard you work, how you pursue an education, how you deal with personal responsibility, how you live your life, etc.
He believed that working hard, doing good work & pursuing an education would (in the long run) lift African Americans out of poverty & out of the ghettos. And while racist people will always exist, he felt that if African American people were known for their hard work & good quality work, then capitalism would overcome racism. Because even racist employers want the best workers possible.
We studied black philosophers like Booker T. Washington & George Washington Carver (briefly) in a college. Their insights were very inspiring.
The problem is that people like Saul Alinsky (and proponents of his Rules for Radicals) convinced many leaders in the African American community that Booker T. Washington (and others like him) were wrong & that only an “us vs them” attitude would work.
This attitude ultimately leads to a higher crime rate in poor areas, more single motherhood-ness, etc.
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
With respect to the title of the article, I believe that it is usually editors who write titles and headlines, not the author of the article. But I have no idea who wrote the title in this case.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
Perhaps by returning to and celebrating marriage as a covenant relationship and a pathway to holiness in which husband and wife form a domestic church and assist each other towards their heavenly destination and in which children are seen as the fruit of this covenant, as souls, entrusted to parents by God to be raised to become saints.
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
I agree wholeheartedly; but of course this view of marriage is one which should apply to every married couple.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
Yes. I was responding to catholiclala who was discussing the challenge of finding others who were seeking these sorts of relationships. My impression was that, while speaking to her own heritage, she was noting that this challenge transcended race. I agree with her about this and agree with you that my suggestions have a universal application. Families of all sorts of racial or ethnic backgrounds could benefit from this and many are in need of revival.
I think that Phil’s argument that working hard (at marriage and at one’s job) can also be helpful, creating models for children to follow, and creating sources of increased financial stability and foundations for self-respect which can be extended to respect for others. And finally, and, to me most importantly, recognizing that our value comes from being children of God and so does the value of everyone else whom we encounter. To me, this is a rock capable of supporting a society (and a family is a small society).
I think that Phil’s argument that working hard (at marriage and at one’s job) can also be helpful, creating models for children to follow, and creating sources of increased financial stability and foundations for self-respect which can be extended to respect for others. And finally, and, to me most importantly, recognizing that our value comes from being children of God and so does the value of everyone else whom we encounter. To me, this is a rock capable of supporting a society (and a family is a small society).
Last edited:
1
1cthlctrth
Guest
Children from fatherless homes are:
5 times more likely to commit suicide
32 times more likely to run away
20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
14 times more likely to commit rape
9 times more likely to drop out of high school
10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances
9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution
20 times more likely to end up in prison.
5 times more likely to commit suicide
32 times more likely to run away
20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
14 times more likely to commit rape
9 times more likely to drop out of high school
10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances
9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution
20 times more likely to end up in prison.
C
catholiclala
Guest
But how is that achieved in practical steps?
J
jeannetherese
Guest
It’s a slow process. The problem is generations in the making and may take a long time to turn around-particularly given the culture and the way that social structures and our schools are working to promote sex as recreational pleasure rather than emphasizing it as a means of growing ones family.
Parents need to stand up as a countercultural force and shape a new culture, churches need to do the same, school curriculums need to be challenged and changed, marriages and children need to be upheld.
Ultimately, it’s going to take a lot of evanglization and catechesis.
it will help when more people begin questioning the empty promises of the current narrative.
Sometimes it takes a while for people to figure out that what they are doing is unfulfilling and not good for them-Saint Augustine comes to mind.
i think Josies’ posting from the Brookings institute offered a structural analysis, but, if the problem (or a third of it as the instute offered a 3problem scenario) is pregnancy out of wedlock then solutions become less sex, earlier marriages, or lots of abortions.
Our society is pushing lots of abortions-particularly in low income/and/or African American communities. Ultimately, I think this reifies notion of sex without covenental understandings and commitments. We do shape our culture and we can change it, one child and one family at a time. We can be the change we want to see in the world. But, I imagine it might be pretty lonely because there currently, at least in my community, is not a lot of support for this. But each family which stabilizes, provides an example and thus support for others. We can acknowledge others as children of God, even when they are not acknowledging themselves as such. It’s practical, but on an individual basis it is small scale. Keeping an eye out for like minded souls, establishing Christian parenting co-ops-there are different scales of application.
Parents need to stand up as a countercultural force and shape a new culture, churches need to do the same, school curriculums need to be challenged and changed, marriages and children need to be upheld.
Ultimately, it’s going to take a lot of evanglization and catechesis.
it will help when more people begin questioning the empty promises of the current narrative.
Sometimes it takes a while for people to figure out that what they are doing is unfulfilling and not good for them-Saint Augustine comes to mind.
i think Josies’ posting from the Brookings institute offered a structural analysis, but, if the problem (or a third of it as the instute offered a 3problem scenario) is pregnancy out of wedlock then solutions become less sex, earlier marriages, or lots of abortions.
Our society is pushing lots of abortions-particularly in low income/and/or African American communities. Ultimately, I think this reifies notion of sex without covenental understandings and commitments. We do shape our culture and we can change it, one child and one family at a time. We can be the change we want to see in the world. But, I imagine it might be pretty lonely because there currently, at least in my community, is not a lot of support for this. But each family which stabilizes, provides an example and thus support for others. We can acknowledge others as children of God, even when they are not acknowledging themselves as such. It’s practical, but on an individual basis it is small scale. Keeping an eye out for like minded souls, establishing Christian parenting co-ops-there are different scales of application.
C
catholiclala
Guest
I think Catholic evangelization and catechesis need work, big time. I converted in my 30s but it had nothing to do with evangelization. In fact, whenever any Christian tried to convert me it drew me the other direction. My RCIA class was great except when it came to sexual morality and marriage. Both were glossed over. There is also little effective help for singles. We have dating sites that are just as bad as the secular ones or lame singles events. It’s a mess.
P
phil19034
Guest
Honestly, I don’t think it can be achieved by government. This was something that both Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X both agreed on.
The problem (I see) in the African American community (as an outsider) is that the Black leaders who promote family values, etc are rarely given a national platform (outside of FoxNews). Instead, “leaders” like Maxine Waters, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc are given national attention.
And when black conservatives, like Candace Owens, are often made out to be race traders by Democrats & other liberals, so often their ideas are not even heard.
The other problem is that the Democratic Party (in my opinion) almost worships single motherhood.
- Yes, single mothers (and single fathers) who are single due to no fault of their own, should have a special place in our hearts. However, the idea that single motherhood (as a whole) is just as good (if not better) than mother & father living together is a major problem. The left (esp the far left) don’t see divorce, babies out of wedlock, fornication, abortion, in-vetro, etc. as a problem. They consider all of those things to be vaid lifestyle options.
I know groups like The Woodson Center are doing good work, but we need more of those groups.
Anyway, my thinking is this:
- evangelize & catacize
- treat all African Americans you encounter with respect & befriend ones you encounter regularly in your lives.
- encourage African Americans to read the writings of Booker T. Washington, George Washington Carver, Rev. Martin Luther King (and yes - use REV), and contemporary Black Conservatives.
- Men, if you can, volunteer at youth centers (esp ones for at risk boys)
- Status