To combat racism, try reviving the black family

[Elizabeth3]

I assume what you mean is that black irresponsibility is enforcing negative stereotypes of black people, and that is how it exacerbates the problem. If that is what you are saying, I simply disagree. The causality is simply backwards in that formulation.

No. Your assumption is wrong. What I said about furthering negative stereotypes was in relation to both the rioting and the perception in those who holds various degrees of racism.

While we might understand what leads to the rioting, we would be remiss to think that it doesn’t also further negative racial stereotypes in those who hold various degrees of racial bias. It also leads to counter-violence which puts further fuel on the fire and around and around it keeps spiraling.

Broken families exacerbate the problems caused by racism. Esolen writes, “Blacks did so, [built strong families] before our moral apostasy.” His last paragraph and line lays the blame at the national level, which involves everyone in our society. There is no singling out the black community and laying all the blame at their feet. But that doesn’t mean they have no responsibility at an individual level as well or that we can’t even mention it. He says,

"The conversation we need to have is one that nobody wants to have, because it will involve everybody’s favourite field of sin. It’s a lot easier to blame other people – some of whom may be worthy of blame – or to call upon the mysterious ether of systemic racism than to look in the mirror and say, to the only person whose sins you have the power to check, “You there, what you are doing is fun. Too bad. It harms the common good. It hurts you and your people worst of all. Grow up.”

We need, in other words, a national moral revival. We are not likely to get it."

 

[TMC]

No. Your assumption is wrong. What I said about furthering negative stereotypes was in relation to both the rioting and the perception in those who holds various degrees of racism.

Then I don’t understand the nexus. How does immoral or irresponsible behavior by black people further racism, then?

Broken families exacerbate the problems caused by racism.

Maybe. But that is not what the author is saying. He is saying that immorality among black people is causing broken families, which is causing racism.

 

[Elizabeth3]

I have a problem with singling out black families as if they have a particular problem in that area, or that those problems are the cause of racism.

They do have a problem in that area. 70% out-of-wedlock births is very problematic. So do all the other communities have similar problems because morality has broken down at the national, cultural level. No one is saying broken families are the cause of racism. Unless you mean that some broken white families can perpetuate racism by holding to ignorant views due to lack of morals all around and lack of proper education.

I am quite certain that is exactly the point of the article. It may not be your point, but I do believe it is his.

I realize you believe he is saying that but no where does he say he opposes further civil rights advancements. That’s not one of his points. In mentioning current civil rights advancements, he is giving examples that racism isn’t endemic in American culture. That’s different than saying it doesn’t exist at all or that there should be no more advancements.

 

[TMC]

No one is saying broken families are the cause of racism.

This is EXACTLY what he is saying. The title of the article is “To combat racism, try reviving the black family.” Its his thesis statement!

I realize you believe he is saying that but no where does he say he opposes further civil rights advancements.

No, he doesn’t say it out loud. But it sure seems like the point.

I don’t know if we can ever agree on this. But I think it is important to deal forthrightly with racism, and not blame it on the moral shortcomings of its victims. I am glad you do not agree with that position, but I do think that articles like this one are trying to spread that message.

 

[meltzerboy2]

It is common belief among many Whites that if only Blacks would have intact moral families with strong fathers in particular, stop the drinking, drug-taking, and stealing, go to Church on a regular basis, and be in general good upstanding citizens, then there would be no racism against them at all. But it is up to them to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps without always asking for special favors in the form of welfare and other government handouts. My fellow White CAF’ers, admit that you have always, often, or sometimes felt this way about Black people. Admit it to yourselves.

However, the fact of the matter is that racism against Black people began a long time ago when Black families were intact and Church going (many still are today), had strong and loving fathers present in their home as well as strong, loving mothers, and were in general upstanding citizens of their community. Heck most Black people today are law-abiding, hard-working members of their community. Still, there was terrible racism against Black people in the North as well as the South. It was not a matter of lawlessness or laziness on the part of Blacks that caused racism. No, it was their being Black, pure and simple, and Whites believing themselves superior to the Black race. When are Whites going to admit that this is the primary cause of racism rather than perpetually blaming the victim for their immoral and lawless lifestyle?

 

[jeannetherese]

The title of the article is “To combat racism, try reviving the black family.” Its his thesis statement!

Combat is a verb, meaning to fight. Mightn’t a strong intact black family be better able to fight racism than a broken family? Strengthening families seems like a strategy which could prove helpful in the sense that we are stronger together.
Of course, there may be other strategies to pursue as well.

 

[Elizabeth3]

How does immoral or irresponsible behavior by black people further racism, then?

In reference to rioting, destroying property, looting, and beating people in the streets that stems from frustration about racism, those behaviors will further racial stereotypes in those who hold various degrees of racial bias.. When that happens, instead of being able to break down those biases through civil dialogue, it entrenches them more in those who hold them and leads to spiraling counter-violence. This isn’t blaming blacks for racism. It demonstrates how those behaviors contributes to the cycle. Destructive rioting as a way to voice frustration comes from the breakdown of the family which comes from a breakdown in morality in the culture at large. When one doesn’t have strong family support, good education, examples of good moral standards etc., then one lacks a more effective and civil means to communicate anger and frustration.

But that is not what the author is saying. He is saying that immorality among black people is causing broken families, which is causing racism.

No. He is saying that immorality in the culture at large is causing broken families and that that weakens the black community which does nothing to help them combat racism. It hinders them. He never says immorality among black people is a cause of racism.

 

[meltzerboy2]

Why is the onus of combating racism on Black people rather than on White people, who are by far the ones who have perpetuated racism against Blacks for centuries?

It is the same as saying that Catholic families should be morally intact so that they can combat racism. Shouldn’t it be the responsibility of the larger, non-Catholic society to combat anti-Catholicism? Likewise for Jewish families or Muslim families.

I agree with you that moral values should be taught within all families, and that alone would make for a better, more law-abiding society. But since when are the targets of racism obligated to do most of the work in combating racism? Isn’t it time for the majority of people who hold racist attitudes to re-examine their own moral values and behaviors?

 

[Elizabeth3]

To combat racism, try reviving the black family.” Its his thesis statement!

If you read the article, you will not find anywhere that he says broken families cause racism. He is saying strong families are better able to combat it. Is that not true?

No, he doesn’t say it out loud. But it sure seems like the point.

Not sure how it can seem like the point [no need for more civil rights advancements] if he states that his point is that racism isn’t endemic in American culture and these examples are why.

But I think it is important to deal forthrightly with racism, and not blame it on the moral shortcomings of its victims.

No one is blaming racism on the moral failings of it’s victims. It’s saying they can fight against it more effectively if they have strong families. I’ve made this point over and over. Not sure what is so difficult to understand about it. It’s true.

I am glad you do not agree with that position, but I do think that articles like this one are trying to spread that message.

Despite what you think, that is not the message it’s trying to spread.

 

[meltzerboy2]

Strong, moral families didn’t help Emmett Till, Medgar Evers, Martin Luther King, Jr. as well as many other Blacks in the 1950’s and 1960’s. They were killed anyway, Jim Crow laws in the South were the norm, Blacks were treated worse than animals. If it weren’t for the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s, the Freedom Riders, the Black Church, charismatic Black leaders such as MLK and others, our nation would still be discriminating overtly against Black people, in the South of course, but also in the North. Today I think discrimination remains and social injustice toward Blacks is still a problem, but I hope we can all agree, it is not what it used to be. However, the battle continues because the war is not over yet, and if we as a country are not vigilant, the gains from the past can easily be taken away. This is true for other groups as well including the LGBT community.

 

[BT3241]

I have always wondered about white supremacist - how can they believe in Jesus - he was a practicing jew the sworn enemy of a white supremacist - its a paradox.

 

[meltzerboy2]

White Supremacists are surely not followers of Jesus. They hide behind their own distorted view of Christianity in an attempt to justify their racist attitudes and persecutory behavior toward Blacks and Jews (Catholics, too). Similar to ISIS terrorists in this respect.

 

[BT3241]

God specifically choose to be an Israelite and be a practicing Jew after all he established it he wasn’t going to come as a follow of Baal. I say this because some say Jesus was not a Jew.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

If you read the article, you will not find anywhere that he says broken families cause racism. He is saying strong families are better able to combat it. Is that not true?

No, that is not true. The racism at issue is a problem with whites. There may be racism among blacks too, but that is not the racism that the article purports to address.

So given that the racism in question is a problem from outside the black family, no amount of family improvement is going to change white minds. In fact, successful blacks may be more of an irritant to those racist whites than poor blacks living in slum conditions because the former challenges their pre-existing attitudes while the latter confirms them.

Note: this is not a condemnation of whites in general, nor is it a claim of how common or uncommon racism like this might be. It is just an observation that I made way earlier in this thread that the title is nonsense, and that a better title might be “To combat inequality, try reviving the black family.” That at least has some chance of being true.

 

[Sarcelle]

Not all white supremacists claim to be Christians.

Some follow the old Northern European pagan religion.

 

[TMC]

No. He is saying that immorality in the culture at large is causing broken families and that that weakens the black community which does nothing to help them combat racism. It hinders them. He never says immorality among black people is a cause of racism.

He does. That is the very thesis of his article. Its in the title. Its in the conclusion. It is his only point. You apparently don’t agree with him, and want to read what he says as something more charitable than it is. But that is his point.

 

[Elizabeth3]

Why is the onus of combating racism on Black people rather than on White people, who are by far the ones who have perpetuated racism against Blacks for centuries?

Is that what the article said? Reviving the black family will only happen in the larger context of sexual morality being held up by the entire culture. Everyone, including blacks, has an individual personal responsibility in rising to this challenge. That’s you, me and anyone else interested in combating racism. It’s a piece of the puzzle. A tool in the toolbox. The breakdown in effective dialogue is a result of the breakdown of the family across the board. This breakdown has disproportionately affected the black community.

Esolen blames this on other causes hijacking the civil rights movement. He says, " Had white Americans in the first half of the 20th century made even a half-hearted effort to be just to blacks, Moynihan might never have had to write that report, or if he had, it might have been heeded. As it was, it came at the worst time. Feminists and the rest of the Pelvic Left sent blacks to the back of the Bus for Social Change, where they have remained ever since, treated as stalking-horses or mascots, while Christians who decry both racism and family breakdown cannot be heard above the noise."

It is the same as saying that Catholic families should be morally intact so that they can combat racism. Shouldn’t it be the responsibility of the larger, non-Catholic society to combat anti-Catholicism? Likewise for Jewish families or Muslim families.

No. It’s the same as saying Catholic families should be morally intact so they can better fight against anti-Catholicism. Saying strong families help Catholics better fight against anti-Catholicism does not mean they hold sole responsibility for the fight and those who hold anti-Catholic views are exempt from their responsibility. Neither does it mean, the larger responsibility falls to the victim. However, it’s natural to want to defend yourself from any kind of victimization and having tools to do that makes that fight easier to take on.

But since when are the targets of racism obligated to do most of the work in combating racism?

They aren’t obligated to do most of the work and the article doesn’t make that assertion. It says moral choices are made when each person looks in the mirror and makes the decision to do their part for the common good.

 

[meltzerboy2]

And those who say this have a distorted view of Christianity.

 

[Rubee]

Some follow the old Northern European pagan religion.

Yes. There’s been a movement away from Christianity among them into the old pagan Germanic religion because Christianity admits every race. They prefer Valhala to Paradise because the former admits no negros, in their view. Ironically, more benign/New-agey modern pagans have been protesting this because they tend to be liberal and hate Supremacists adopting the same beliefs.

 

[Sarcelle]

Esolen could have just said that strong families and virtue filled lives will go a long way towards combating inequality and the lack of opportunities that come with poverty.

However, racism is an action of the racist and it is up to the racist to change their behavior.