Diversity, Top Stories

The Infantilization of Black America

In contemporary political discourse, black America often seems to be perceived as a monolith. We are expected to think, act, and vote as one, and any attempt to step outside the bounds of our pre-determined spectrum of thoughts can lead to summary excommunication. Our diversity pertains to our race, ethnicity, gender orientation, or sexual preference when set against the rest of the American population, but the diversity of opinions, beliefs, and values found among American blacks is seldom acknowledged. Even though the ‘black community’ in America includes immigrants from Africa, the Caribbean, and Latin America, as well as multiracial individuals and descendants of the slave trade, we are often grouped together as one large indistinguishable ideological bloc.

Consider the recent criticism heaped on Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott. Prescott committed the apparently unpardonable sin of saying that he doesn’t agree with the NFL players who chose to protest police violence by taking a knee during the national anthem. Speaking to reporters, Prescott said:

I never protest during the anthem and I don’t think that’s the time or the venue to do so. The game of football has always brought me such a peace and I think it does the same for a lot of other people, people playing the game, people watching the game and any people that have an impact on the game. So when you bring such a controversy to the stadium, to the field, to the game, it takes away. It takes away from the joy and the love that football brings a lot of people. I’m all about making a change and making a difference. I think this whole kneeling and all that was all about just raising awareness. The fact that we’re still talking about social injustice years later I think we’ve got to that point…I’m up for taking that next step, whatever that step may be for action and not just kneeling. I’ve always believed in standing up for what I believe in.

Prescott never stated that the players protesting be punished for doing so—on the contrary, he acknowledged the validity of the protest, even if he didn’t approve of the time and place, and said he respected his colleagues’ actions even though he didn’t agree with them. For this frank and honest expression of a dissenting view, he has been rewarded with a backlash from fans and peers alike. Prescott stepped outside of his prescribed bubble of acceptable opinions and must now be reproached into repentance.

John McWhorter

In various areas of life—from politicians, athletes, actors, and musicians to everyday people—black Americans are not allowed to think for themselves or depart from the prevailing consensus. Senator Tim Scott is routinely called an Uncle Tom, a ‘coon,’ and worse simply because he is a Republican, while commentators and public intellectuals such as Thomas Sowell, Antonia Okafor, Larry Elder, and John McWhorter are rarely called upon by the mainstream media to discuss issues of race in America. Others, such as Marc Lamont Hill, Michael Eric Dyson, Roland Martin, and Joy Ann Reid, whose views align more closely with progressive orthodoxies, are invited to carry the black American ideological torch instead. In the recent “State of Black America Town Hall” hosted by Roland Martin, all of the panelists were on the left of the political spectrum. Are we to believe that there was nothing to be gained from the inclusion of opposing viewpoints? That conservative or centrist voices have nothing to contribute to a debate about how to improve and encourage education, health, social justice, prosperity, and civic engagement in black America? Is leadership in the black community dependent on whether a person votes blue or red as opposed to the viability and merit of their arguments?

Black voters are expected to be Democrats—or at least left-leaning in their politics—not because of their views on this-or-that policy initiative, but because of the perceived racial attitudes of Republicans. But this has resulted in an odd paradox—despite black progressives’ professed hatred for ‘systemically racist’ government and institutions, they continue to trust in and empower those same institutions by voting for policies that strengthen them and their ability to hold sway in our lives. If you believe the government is oppressing you, it is surely counter-productive to demand that it take more of your money, that it institute policies that further criminalize your behavior, or that increase its ability to infringe on your privacy.

Well-meaning white progressives, meanwhile, treat black Americans more like the family pet than the family friend, condescending to praise us when we align with their views, and ferally attacking when we don’t. The conversation about race in America has been framed by progressive media and co-opted by the Democratic party to supplement the coalition that supported Obama during his presidency—presumably in the hope that blacks would gratefully support Hillary in her run for office. But Democrats have come to take the black voting bloc for granted—even though 44 percent of black voters consider themselves moderate and another 27 percent consider themselves conservative, black Americans still overwhelmingly vote Democrat (90 percent).

Voting demographics are critically important, because whoever wins elections is then in a position to make and influence policy. While black Americans have been voting Democrat, the wealth gap between blacks and whites has widened, with one in four black households having zero to negative net worth, and black families having $5.04 to every $100 in a white family. Of the ten poorest cities in America, nine are run by Democrats. Of the ten cities with the highest levels of unemployment, nine are run by Democrats. Of the ten most dangerous cities in America, eight are run by Democrats. In each case, those affected are disproportionately black, with blacks having higher rates of poverty, lower rates of income, and higher rates of criminality. Despite a dearth of evidence that voting Democrat has an inherently positive impact on life as a black man or woman in America, progressives continue to demonize any attempt by blacks to look for solutions beyond the Democratic echo chamber.

The saddest part of this narrative is that liberals seem to think they have little of value to offer black voters besides apologies for past transgressions and a savior complex that promises to police current society’s racial shortcomings. Often the voices screaming the loudest following instances of racial animus or law enforcement misconduct belong to white progressives who have taken it upon themselves to champion causes on behalf of the politically mute or ‘marginalized.’ This embarrassing spectacle sometimes resembles an adult who humors a fractious infant just to reassure it that he is an amiable and unthreatening figure. This does not, of course, mean that support and solidarity from whites on racial issues isn’t necessary or welcome. But support and thoughtless acquiescence to a particular narrative are not synonymous.

If I say that racism does not play a large role in my life, that statement doesn’t invalidate the effects of racism in another black person’s life. Nor does it mean that I don’t believe racism is itself a problem. It is simply an acknowledgement that the ‘black experience’ is not everywhere and always the same. The idea that racism is an omnipresent factor in the everyday life of black people and an all-purpose explanation for what ails them is ludicrous. The struggles and experiences of a black middle-class child from Kansas are not the same as the struggles of a black middle-class child from Maryland, which are not the same as the struggles of an inner city black child from St. Louis, Chicago, or Dallas, and so on. Individuals often have more in common with people from similar income classes than they do with those in their racial group, because income has become a larger discriminatory factor than race. This is consistently demonstrated in education and career statistics. Black Americans may be rich or poor, religious or atheist, academic and/or athletic, conservative or radical, and so on. To reduce the black identity to a vote determined by race or ethnicity is not only insulting, it’s frankly racist.

That black Americans adhere to these rules is disappointing. With the common goal of improving the lives of blacks everywhere, and providing equity and inclusion for all, black Americans should welcome diverse viewpoints and opinions. Intellectual diversity discourages political complacency—if prevailing ideas and beliefs are challenged, thought and reflection are required to defend them. If I believe I’m right, I should welcome the opportunity to test that assumption and to alter my views in the light of new data and perspectives I may not have considered. My opinions about improving the lives of other blacks are no less valid just because I have arrived at a shared goal by a different route. It is through conversations with those with whom we disagree that we’re able to inform and learn from others. We can then use the diversity of argument and thought to strengthen our communities and foster the change we all seek.

Unfortunately, the progressive orthodoxy on ‘black issues’ often seems to be reducible to the assumption that blacks are incapable of succeeding on our own merits. We require Affirmative Action because, when left to our own test scores and grades, black students are unable to gain entrance into prestigious institutions of higher learning. Instead, we need help just to compete at the same level as not just whites, but also other minorities. The same paternalistic impulse informs discussions about employment, crime, movie roles and awards, and so on: blacks can’t be trusted to achieve or stay out of trouble on their own, and so someone else must step in. This mindset, in which black Americans are passive victims rather than agents, only infantilizes them.

This is not a benign problem. The monocausal progressive explanation for black disadvantage is dangerous for two reasons. Firstly, it imposes a false conformity that helps ensure alternative hypotheses which might improve understanding of the underlying complexities of racial disparities in America are left unexplored and undiscussed. Secondly, the reflexive imputation of racial bias in situations where alternative explanations for behavior are readily available risks inducing a skeptical fatigue. So, when racism does rear its head, it has already been trivialized and risks being ignored. With the best of intentions, progressives have taken it upon themselves to speak for black America. But it is black America that will pay the price for the narrowing of acceptable thought progressives demand.

 

Tosin Akintola graduated from UMBC in 2017 with a B.A in Political Science, he is an editor and contributing writer at Lone Conservative and currently works in Higher Education.

Listen to this article

88 Comments

  1. Charlos says

    Great article especially in light of the recent tragic news out of Chicago that 41 Black people (many women and innocent bystanders) were shot this weekend over barely two days. Reading the coverage I heard many calls for mayor Rahm Emanuel to “resign for not doing enough to stop the violence”. He might not be doing enough I’m not sure, but this call for help from a progressive city leader goes to your point.

    • Crime rises, cops “do something about it,” everyone bitches, cops back off, crime rises. And so it goes.

    • David of Kirkland says

      How many good citizens in those neighborhoods reported the criminals to the police?

  2. It’s a good piece, but rehashes the same lines of argument that black conservatives always seem to bring to the debate, so it’s not adding much new. Which doesn’t mean it’s not valid, only that what black America –- indeed, all of America — needs is a fresh way forward for African-Americans that isn’t contained within the existing conservative or liberal orthodoxies. This new way of thinking needs to arise organically, away from white people and all the institutions that white people dominate (like academia and the political establishment). Black America needs clear-headed, courageous, and, most importantly, original thinkers to figure out how to get itself out of the mess that they’re in, which has been, unfortunately, largely self-perpetuated. Or it can fall back on the tried-and-true sophistries of someone like Tennessee Coates. I want to be optimistic that something good will happen, but I’d be lying if I said that I am.

    • Lydia says

      That thinking is exactly the problem. Political identity collectivism. You see “group” instead of the individual. A Self Governing individual is the key. Forget race and gender. Focus on individuals.

      • @Lydia

        I don’t think what you’re saying and what I wrote are necessarily incompatible. The new way forward for black people in America could involve something like what you’re advocating –- a widespread recognition on their part that success boils down to the effort and character of the Individual, and doesn’t have to involve an ideological program tied to the Group. The problem with thinking that’s going to happen, though, is that group identity among blacks is stronger than virtually anywhere else in the US, and this acts to cancel out the appeal of “individual agency.” That’s why hard-working and successful African-Americans hardly ever criticize that parasitic and violent portion of the black underclass that functions as a permanent drag on the country and which can never seem to understand that most of its problems don’t lie elsewhere.

        • Chick says

          Can anyone explain the pack mentality, or why encouraging a tribal attitude among blacks by white leftists for their nefarious purposes, is never called out? This article implies “the best of intentions” by the poverty pimps and overseers of the plantation, yet acknowledges the feral response toeards the non compliant infants.

        • peanut gallery says

          And really, the more racist members of black communities won’t be willing to listen to white people, their ideology prevents it. So we do sort of need a bridges into getting them to on board a path the moves to a solution. Right now their solution is “white people submit.”

    • When you say this: “Which doesn’t mean it’s not valid, only that what black America –- indeed, all of America — needs is a fresh way forward for African-Americans that isn’t contained within the existing conservative or liberal orthodoxies. This new way of thinking needs to arise organically, away from white people and all the institutions that white people dominate (like academia and the political establishment).” I’d like to know how you think this is realistically possible? Certainly, neither the existing liberal and conservative orthodoxies have any real solutions for much of anything, at least in part because neither of them seem to recognize the importance of compromise. However, I’m not sure how you plan to have a “new way of thinking arise organically away from white people and institutions that white people dominate”. I’m not sure that something like that is even possible, and even if it were I’m not sure that it’s realistic to expect that all of us white people will just acquiesce to what you came up with in this non-white vacuum you’re referencing.

      Realistically, I think you’ll only find something that has a chance of working when you include all “types” of Americans in working on a solution to this problem which when it comes right down to it doesn’t just affect Black Americans.

      • @Rob Monson

        When black people come up with their own ideas those ideas are automatically conferred a legitimacy, power, and “authenticity” they wouldn’t have if they came from some white guy, and therefore they have more of a chance of making an impact in that community. And it’s not even necessary that the ideas (i.e., the content) be revolutionary as long as the rhetoric and packaging containing them seems new and fresh and hopeful.

        • Coleman Blackstone says

          “When black people come up with their own ideas those ideas are automatically conferred a legitimacy, power, and “authenticity” they wouldn’t have if they came from some white guy, and therefore they have more of a chance of making an impact in that community.” This statement implies that you speak on behalf of the black community. It’s also racist. You’re literally stating that ideas have more legitimacy, power, and authenticity coming from a black person than a white person to the black community. The whole point of this article is that the black community is nuanced, and not a monolith. You’ve projected your own viewpoints onto the entire black community.

          • I fully suspect he does not mean it, but Radical Centrism also seems to indicate that Black Americans are of a different kind rather than of the same kind, human, with varying degrees of similar or different life experiences. Because we are of the same kind, we can share thoughts and ideas from others of our kind, regardless their shade of brown or place of origin. It seems that until we embrace our shared humanity and fundamental sameness we will have an extremely difficult time getting beyond our differences. If we accept the concept of Truth we must also accept that there is but one Truth which is no respecter of persons. Then we can join the discussion as equals.

          • @Coleman Blackstone

            I wrote that black people are probably going to be better than anybody else at coming up with solutions for themselves that will generate wide acceptance and impact in their community, and this is a “racist” idea?

        • Johan Swede says

          @A New Radical…I’m white. Thomas Sowell is black. Should I stop listening to him?

          • @Johan Swede

            You wrote: “I’m white. Thomas Sowell is black. Should I stop listening to him?”

            No, of course not. But if white people in America were a minority and black people were the majority, and there were problems uniquely endemic to white people in America that had existed for decades, and none of the ideas proposed by the majority black population to solve those problems had worked, then wouldn’t it occur to the minority white population at some point that maybe it might be time to try to come up with their own solutions, and that these might have a better chance of gaining acceptance and traction in their community, and therefore ultimately be more effective? If nothing had worked — if all the ideas promulgated by the majority black culture had failed — then wouldn’t it occur to whites that they need to stop listening to what black people were telling them might work, and start figuring things out for themselves?

            It’s as though you think that there are no cultural differences between blacks and whites in America, no difference in how they perceive their position and history, and that everybody sees things the same way.

    • Johan Swede says

      @ A New Redical…Do what? How? Tou need to be conconcrete?

  3. Charlos says

    “figure out how to get itself out of the mess that they’re in, which has been, unfortunately, largely self-perpetuated.” I agree and it cannot be white people progressive or not to help them. I like how you didn’t even try to spell Ta-Nehisi right. Thinking like his is exactly what black people don’t need.

  4. Thoughtful article.

    It’s also quite disturbing that there appears to a a strong backlash developing wherein many Caucasians seem to be developing a strong tribal identity while lock and loading to create (They think recreate) a ‘white’ America. I grew up in the most northern of the southern states, Florida, yet today I’m seeing more disdain and distrust between ethnic groups than any time in my 80 years on this earth.

    While I applaud Akintola’s desire to improve to lot of Black Americans, personally I believe the right direction is to work toward MLK’s dream wherein we’ll all secure, proud Americans.

    • ADM64 says

      MLK’s most famous statement, about people being judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin was left off his monument in Washington. Huge swathes of the left consider it an expression of racism, especially when spoken by whites. The so-called anti-racists stand with Orvall Faubus in claiming that race matters, and reject color-blind as racism. No progress will be possible in the face of such attitudes, which are overwhelmingly on one side of the spectrum and dominant in academia, the arts, and the media.

  5. nizhnydave says

    I’ve struggled to understand how blacks blame whites for their problems while simultaneously demanding that whites fix those problems. But more seriously, I am glad to hear blacks say they need to take matters into their own hands and think of new and creative ways to deal with the issues that afflict them. I just hope that resentment towards whites doesn’t cause them to avoid tried and true ways that already exist. These have been labeled as “white” ways by some, though these methods work for every other ethnic group in the world. Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore seem to have utilized these tried and true methods with great success. To say they are just acting white would be grossly ridiculous.

    • ga gamba says

      I’ve struggled to understand how blacks blame whites for their problems while simultaneously demanding that whites fix those problems.

      From what I’ve viewed and read it appears leftist black leaders expect deference and subservience from white allies. An assertion is made, whites are to affirm it unquestioningly, and they work to satisfy the demand. The art of persuasion has been dispensed with because it’s a “demand for unpaid labour” by those who challenge the narrative by asking questions.

      The same tactic is also used by some feminists, such as on the topic of abortion. “If you don’t have a uterus you have no say.” “Well, you’re demanding my tax be used, so I do have a say.”

      I’ve even seen it advocated by progressive pundits appearing on news panel programmes who state their opponents shouldn’t allowed to appear to voice their views because the issue is settled; or, the opponent represent a minority view, so the expectation of balance, of presenting both sides, needn’t be adhered to. They often state “You wouldn’t have flat earthers appear,” drawing a false equivalence to issues that are still in flux.

      The peculiar thing about it is these game players think they’ve said something terribly clever – a mic-drop moment – yet it’s really a confession of one’s unpreparedness.

      As I see it, the gambit is a method to bypass scrutiny and accountability, Often the progressive’s arguments are emotive, which tend not to fare well when under the harsh glare of rational scrutiny. They’re more effective as monologues and as written pieces where readers’ opinions are not allowed. When you don’t have a leg to stand on, it’s easier to win the one-sided argument.

      A foundational principle of democracy is the political actor’s accountability which mandates scrutiny. Dispensing with this takes us back to rule by authoritarian aristocrats who expect everything from their whims to their decrees be complied with.

      • Sydney says

        Quite a leap in your argument from black/white blame/responsibility to ABORTION. Hello, non sequitur. Abortion is only a public discussion in the most backward developed Western nations. Everyone else has long since properly settled it as an issue for a woman to decide, period. It will be nice when it ceases to exist as a topic bandied about in ‘debate class’ by undergrad boys.

        If you need a medical procedure and my taxes help pay for it, then so be it (whether or not I ‘approve’ of it, which I may not if I follow some faiths, for example). If I need a pregnancy terminated and your taxes are somehow involved, then so be it.

        My body is not communal. My body doesn’t belong to you for ‘debate’ class or for any other reason. My body doesn’t belong to your community. My body is mine. The American conservative (and I’m situated as a ‘political’ and economic conservative) right misses this fact when it rages against termination (and the correct term is termination, since ‘abortion’ suggests that the pregnancy won’t end prematurely in a number of different ways). The right wants the state out of everything possible…except, funnily, a woman’s body.

        Nobody on Earth is ever stopping women from terminating pregnancies. Not ever. It’s a part of women’s lives and will always be. You know MANY more women who have terminated pregnancies than you’re aware of. I fell off my chair laughing when NYT’s publisher called abortion ‘rare’ several years ago.

        Civilized nations recognize that pregnancy termination is a fact of life for women, and put the issue to rest. By including pregnancy termination in the list of necessary medical procedures it recognizes that a woman’s body is her property. And it’s the rational thing for the state to do, since a safe termination in a clean environment by trained individuals is less dangerous than a root canal or ANYTHING requiring a general anaesthetic. An illegal termination (in a nation that needs to own women’s bodies) is likely to seriously harm or kill a woman.

        Please reconsider when you wish to lob ‘abortion’ into a unrelated discussion. My body isn’t your rhetoric toy, and it doesn’t belong in a discussion about American black-white politics.

        I’m not looking for a discussion here (I won’t be returning). This isn’t a ‘crafted’ comment. It’s off the top of my head, so there may be missteps in my own argument. I would just ask that you seriously think and rethink the abortion/pregnancy termination issue. Do some reading. Talk to women (not men: for them it’s purely abstract, theoretical, and emotional) on both sides. It’s obviously both simpler and more complex than you think.

        Now, back to Quillette’s scheduled programming (I came to read this piece because I only recently discovered American black conservative voices like Sowell and Elders, and they’re amazing)…

        • Sydney says

          Whoops, I should have noted that my comment was in response to ‘ga gamba’, not to comments above it.

        • Daniel says

          Sydney,
          Thanks for your post. On the chance you change your mind and do return, perhaps you’d consider addressing the other side of the issue — the babies. That’s the sticking point, the problem that the opponents of your side can’t get past.

          • Dave says

            Indeed, an individual with a heartbeat, brain, and unique DNA is not your body, there fire you do not have the right to terminate it. Conservatives believe you should have the freedom to do whatever you want to your body. When you can have the intellectual integrity to acknowledge this than there is hope for you.

          • Let’s be honest, those opponents don’t want to get past that sticking point because it’s a desperate last attempt to appeal to emotion when faced with facts. Countless studies have shown that a fetus has a 0% chance of survival outside of the uterus, even with modern medicine, at 21 weeks of gestation, reaches a 50% chance of survival around 24 weeks and doesn’t even fully develop the neural network necessary to feel pain until the third trimester. In the US, 90% of the states already prohibit termination by the 24th week unless the woman’s health is in danger, 98.7% happen at or before 21 weeks and 80% of the remaining 1.3% are because of defects so catastrophic the fetus would likely be stillborn or only live for a few very painful days. That means that roughly 99.75% of terminations occur before the fetus can survive, feel or live in unending agony for a couple of hours/days. The notion that women are just running around murdering innocent babies is a gross and intentionally misleading mischaracterization.

        • ADM64 says

          My wallet does not belong to you or anyone else. Whatever one thinks of abortion, no one has a right to anyone else’s labor (and thus services), property, time or good opinion. It is absurd for anyone arguing personal autonomy as the basis for abortion to be arguing for a right to have someone else pay for it. As you dig into Sowell, you will find him make this point on issue after issue.

        • Melvin Backstrom says

          “By including pregnancy termination in the list of necessary medical procedures it recognizes that a woman’s body is her property. And it’s the rational thing for the state to do, since a safe termination in a clean environment by trained individuals is less dangerous than a root canal or ANYTHING requiring a general anaesthetic.”

          Less dangerous to the mother perhaps, but absolutely deadly to the baby, whose life and existence you completely ignore. How very sad.

        • ga gamba says

          You chose to miss the point: the unwillingness and inability of many progressives to debate the topic (be it racially based set asides, abortion, gentrification, whatever) by claiming their opponents’ views may be dismissed simply due to their immutable characteristics such as race and sex.

          Then your comment demonstrates this behavior by, in essence, declaring it not up for discussion, “period.” QED. There’s nothing more persuasive than the strategically placed full stop – it’s punctuation’s mic drop. I’ve been maimed.

          That you chose to support medical procedures “whether or not I ‘approve’ of it” is your choice, but this does not compel others to adhere to your choices. Further, that those in a country, or many countries, in the West deem it “settled” does not oblige everyone else, including yokels, bogans, and hillbillies, to follow along. “Oh, Finland decided it. We have to comply.” When abortion was illegal in much of the West was it “settled” then? Of course not. Thus, it appears to me, you deem things you like “settled” and not up for debate. How convenient for you.

          Re body autonomy and choice, we see a peculiar phenomenon where some feminists, for example the SWERFs, who as radfems perform as “my body my choice” sloganeers, oppose the choice by other women to use their bodies to pursue voluntary sex work, employment in adult films, and even modeling. They are told their individual choices disempower and even harm the collective, and because of this they must be stopped and even the professions made illegal. Who gets to mic drop your “period” here? And will they obey?

          I suppose it’ll disappoint you that I won’t play along in the can’t-talk-about-that game, but it’s okay, I’ll survive.

          I’m not looking for a discussion here (I won’t be returning).

          Okie dokie. But I suspect you will. I recommend you check out Glenn Loury and John McWhorter too. I ought to mention by not returning you’ll miss out on the articles by Coleman Hughes, who doesn’t declare himself conservative, but that’s his only (minor) shortcoming.

          • Fran says

            ga gamba I had a termination over 40 years ago – birth control failure, not carelessness. If that pregnancy had come to term, I would have been tied to an abuser for life. Instead I had a career and 3 wonderful children with a man I still love. I also lost 4 pregnancies quite naturally, well within the statistics for pregnancies sticking. I grieved after the termination and all 4 miscarriages in a way I no man can ever understand. But I have never regretted the decision.

            As for the ‘my taxes’ argument, I suppose you believe in genes? Well given the psychopathology of the guy’s family (his father sexually abused his daughters) it would have probably cost you a lot more if a baby had resulted, and I would not have been paying into the system to help you out.

            Interestingly, this guy thought he owned both the baby and my body, and that it was HIS decision. This seems to be a primitive male attitude reflected in your comment. I guess you are happy to be financially responsible for the outcome.

            This gets back to the same attitude SJW’s have about people ‘inferior to them’ as Tom Lehrer put it in his Brotherhood piece.

        • Mrs. Q says

          Actually bringing abortion into this discussion makes sense in light of the fact 70% of Planned Parenthood clinics are in black/latino neighborhoods. Blacks are also aborted per capita at the highest rate. And too boot Ms. Sanger literally said she wanted to “exterminate” the negro race. Blacks and so-called allies regardless of being pro choice or pro life should question why abortion is so prolific among this particular group and how that came to be. My brown skinned body isn’t your rhetoric toy either. I wish you well.

        • “My body is not communal,” she said, just after demanding that our tax money fund her murdering of babies.

        • Sue says

          Wow. A perfect example of what was pointed out above – ” opponents shouldn’t allowed to appear to voice their views because the issue is settled”

          I’m not going to get into it, because this discussion isn’t about abortion – but on what basis does this writer get to say this is a settled question? It’s not. And I am asserting this from a woman’s perspective.

          Call it settled and move on – that way you don’t have to listen to or consider any ideas that might conflict with your own.

          My Dad used to say, with irony, “Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up.”

          We all need to be open to other ideas and perspectives. Where else does progress come from?

          • ga gamba says

            I’m not going to get into it, because this discussion isn’t about abortion – but on what basis does this writer get to say this is a settled question? It’s not. And I am asserting this from a woman’s perspective.

            Eureka! You get it. Nothing is off the table, especially when the taxpayers’ money is involved.

            To shift the subject at hand, take for example the First Amendment. From my perspective it looks very settled, yet plenty of people advocate for restricting speech. This includes people who, when being sworn into their office, vow to support and defend the Constitution yet then breach it. I don’t harrumph the issue “settled”. I’m more than happy to have a conversation to tell those why they are misguided and dangerous. And I’m happy to explain why those who breach their sworn duty ought to be jailed and fined for contempt of court when they infringe the rights of their fellow citizens, i.e. the ones whose rights they promised to defend.

    • Lydia says

      “I’ve struggled to understand how blacks blame whites for their problems while simultaneously demanding that whites fix those problems.”

      That mostly comes from the people making bank off the situation. The leaders, spokespeople, etc. It can be local or national. It’s insidious. I know of situation after situation where a black families prospered and wanted to move out of horrible neighborhood but a pastor guilted them into staying to help their people. Of course they could increase their giving, too.

    • David of Kirkland says

      Individuals of all identity groups suffer in one way or another. The hope that the group will create a universal solution of improvement for the group is misplaced faith. What is needed is for people to look critically at their lives and determine what they want from their limited life. Some believe that social works are the key; others that individual charity is fine. Some believe in working hard, building wealth, sharing that wealth with their children; others believe in experiencing the world, not having children, working only enough to live their preferences. This idea that blacks have a problem is nonsense, nor that whites are supreme or without troubles. Those who are religious often suffer the same depression and confusion as the atheists, or commit crimes against others. Being black, rich, religious, intelligent, strong, tall, young, etc. are just traits, not universal goals or ideals. You are as happy as you are.

  6. Luke says

    “Of the ten poorest cities in America, nine are run by Democrats. Of the ten cities with the highest levels of unemployment, nine are run by Democrats. Of the ten most dangerous cities in America, eight are run by Democrats. In each case, those affected are disproportionately black, with blacks having higher rates of poverty, lower rates of income, and higher rates of criminality.”

    How many of the ten riches cities are run by Democrats? How many of the cities with the lowest levels of unemployment are run by Democrats? How many of the safest cities are run by Democrats?

    • Portland is a great example. Here is a city that is super liberal and run by Democrats yet their murder rate is a fraction of Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, St. Louis. So what accounts for the difference? That is the sort of question one is not really supposed to think too much about.

    • Lanette says

      Actually, what I keep going back to is income disparity. The states with the worst income disparity are not only liberal, but have been run by liberals for a very, very long time. When is that utopia ever going to appear????? Of the top four states with the highest income disparity, three are and have been run by Democrats for decades!!!! New York, California, and Illinois [https://www.businessinsider.com/income-inequality-in-us-states-ranked-2018-3#4-california-47].

      Just how long and how much money do they need to build this utopia of which they speak? Speaking of money, guess how many states with the biggest debt ratio are liberal? 14/16 liberal states have the largest debt ratio, including, yet again, New York, California, and Illinois [https://www.gobankingrates.com/making-money/economy/states-least-amount-debt/].

      As far as I’m concerned, they’re full of crap and have no intention of building a utopia — all they care about is POWER and the more ignorant idiots who don’t do any research, or any thinking of their own, the more imbeciles they have to vote for them and give them POWER with which they do nothing except line their own pockets. They certainly don’t help their people at all, obviously. All the time its “the sky is falling, the sky is falling”! Vote for us! Then do absolutely nothing until it’s election time again, then repeat. Have 3 or more houses, million dollar weddings, etc on a public servants salary… yeah, color me impressed!!

    • Seeing as most cities are run by Democrats, you have a point. The wealthiest cities are run by democrats, as are the poorest. However, I think you miss the authors real point, which is in the second half of the paragraph you quote.

      “In each case, those affected are disproportionately black, with blacks having higher rates of poverty, lower rates of income, and higher rates of criminality. Despite a dearth of evidence that voting Democrat has an inherently positive impact on life as a black man or woman in America, progressives continue to demonize any attempt by blacks to look for solutions beyond the Democratic echo chamber.”

      It makes sense why residents of wealthy cities would vote for leaders who want to keep the status quo; obliviously it has worked. The real point of that paragraph can be summed up as: ‘Why do black voters keep voting for a party that has proven to have no real answers to their issues. And why is it taboo to even as that question?’

  7. C Young says

    > Even though the ‘black community’ in America includes immigrants from Africa, the Caribbean, and Latin America, as well as multiracial individuals and descendants of the slave trade, we are often grouped together as one large indistinguishable ideological bloc.

    The time to cease using the word ‘black’ is long past.

    Here in London, immigrants from Brazil, Eritrea, Nigeria and Jamaica have little in common except melanin. Eritreans have strong families. Jamaicans incredibly weak ones(judged by paternal involvement). Nigerians are on the receiving end of racism from Jamaicans. Many (not all) Brazilians are used to multi-coloured families and don’t share the concept of race promoted by activists.

    Many toted cures for racism, with their enduring focus on melanin, are worse than the disease. For instance, by the standards of activists, I’m in a mixed race marriage. Yet the only racism we’ve endured was from Caribbean youth, who’ve called out my wife out for crossing their imaginary racial lines.

    • Great post. It is also time for the state (the US Census Bureau) to stop asking each and every individual to self-identify from a list of 19th century quack races, that way, racial categories would be downgraded to no more than a folk taxonomy, which is its proper place.

      Furthermore, and according to the Census Bureau itself, race is neither a scientific nor an anthropological category. They just ask because the law requires them to do so.

      • @Rosa

        You wrote: “[R]ace is neither a scientific nor an anthropological category.”

        Well, hold on to your hat, Rosa, because the advances in genomics and molecular biology are coming at us at light speed these days. Every few weeks, there’s a fresh bulletin from the front. And it’s looking like when the dust settles, the notion of “race” may have a little more legitimacy than you imagine. From Harvard: “Research indicates that the concept of five races does, to an extent, describe the way human populations are distributed among the continents.” There will probably be more precise ways to classify “racial” differences in the future (“genetic clustering” might be a better term even now), but, for now, it’ll do just fine.

        Also, I hope no one notices my string of mixed metaphors above. It’s late, and I’m tired — I think I’ll just leave them standing.

        • Rosa says

          There is also geographic clustering by language, culture, religion, and nationality. That is because people usually procreate with people close to them, not on the other side of the planet. The question is: why should the US Census Bureau cluster people by the language, culture, religion, and nationality of a great-great-grandparent, following the one-drop rule for non-European ancestry, call it a race, and then have academics wildly over-generalize about each?

          Even if scientists are able to identify certain genetic markers by continent, which I do not doubt since everybody can more or less tell just by looking at a person – if they are not terribly mixed or of the cosmopolitan brown type – why are these genetic markers so important to quantify in each and every individual by state authorities? The answer is, obviously, found in the history of trans-continental slavery, colonial caste systems, and the quackery to justify it all.

          Then there is the cultural marker of categorizing people by continental phenotype. It clusters in English-speaking countries. Outside of the US, Canada, the UK, and New Zealand (Australia does no longer ask the race question), very few people would “self-identify” as Americans do.

      • CCZ says

        Then there would be one less category for Affirmative Action, set-asides, Critical Race Studies, or identity politics. Sounds fantastic.

  8. Aaron Kindsvatter says

    Very interesting article, I really enjoyed reading your thoughts. Thank you.

  9. D Bruce says

    I think the right, and the alt media are a bit to blame here too. The recent Mark Levin interview with Shelby Steele deserved much greater discussion in my opinion – Steele takes my vote as the best commentator on race relations today.
    Likewise, Kanye West’s TMZ performance was brilliant and worthy of much more analysis – but the right wing alt media gave it very little space.

  10. What I always find most amusing about Progressive historiography and politics are the denunciations of “white supremacy” and “white males” on the basis that “whites” and especially “white males” falsely presume to be superior to others.

    However, sometimes in the same paragraph, we discover that white males are the only subset of human beings exercising personal agency in the course of human history, all the others are lead like farm animals through the magical power of “racism” and “misogyny”.

    It would seem to me that logically, either white male supremacy is true, and women and nonwhites lack personal agency akin to animals (as Progressive history holds as dogma), or that all humans possess human agency, and the Progressive narrative is pure bunk.

  11. Charlos says

    All humans possess agency to change behavior. To say otherwise would be racist. There’s a certain romanticism of ghetto/gang culture that people forget. It’s in movies and hip hop.I was immersed in this growing up I went to a very diverse high school. All the sports were self segregated. The blacks playing football and basketball, the more well off whites playing soccer etc. I was a poor white kid who loved football so naturally I made a lot of black friends. I would go to parties with them, drive around drinking, and having a great time. They probably liked me because I didn’t act like a “wigger” just a regular white kid who happened to have black friends.

    We got in small altercations here and there and when the cops came they would always interrogate me first. I know there are aspects of black culture that need changed but they are deeply ingrained. There’s tough guy mentality, an adventurous side of living in the “hood” that appeals to white kids living in boring cloistered suburbs. It’s hard to switch that off since it gives an identity to many young blacks.

  12. Sydney says

    “…while commentators and public intellectuals such as Thomas Sowell, Antonia Okafor, Larry Elder, and John McWhorter are rarely called upon by the mainstream media to discuss issues of race in America. Others, such as Marc Lamont Hill, Michael Eric Dyson, Roland Martin, and Joy Ann Reid, whose views align more closely with progressive…”

    This is why it took me so long to discover black conservatives. I blindly bought the line that black Americans are Democrats, and I didn’t venture further. Sowell has been teaching and writing for MANY decades! Elders has a fabulous sense of humour! Now I’m a regular reader and follower, and have put issues about Candace Owens aside to follow her, too. The liberal media keeps all these people tucked away since they upset the ‘master narrative’ (Maya Angelou’s term, I think). Just one of the reasons why the liberal media is losing its audiences.

  13. SweetPeavey says

    Just a quibble about the use of stats…
    The author rightly points out that the majority of mayors in poor and/or dangerous cities are Dems, but so are most mayors in rich/safe cities
    Left leaning, or at least Democrat identified mayors outnumber their GOP counterparts by a considerable margin,(something like 4 to 1), and municipal/urban politics always seem to lean left compared to rural areas, so the point he is trying to make in that case is moot.

    • Sean B says

      The article is about the state of black people in the US. I’m curious how many of the 10 safest/richest cities in the US have large black populations. I believe the point being made is that cities that are the poorest/least safe have large black populations and democrats have been in charge of most of them and have not been able to change things for the better.

    • Alistair says

      The causal models run: black->democrat and black->poor and black -> urban.

      “Black” in turn is a spurious correlate for a gene-culture complex that we cannot *ahem* discuss….

    • You are correct. The US is not divided into red and blue states … it is divided into rural and urban areas, which closely correlate to conservative and liberal. So cities, poor and rich, crime-ridden or safe, will all tend to run democrat.

  14. Mike S says

    Dang, at my age it seems hopeless. Blacks in America especially those who have been here for more than two generations just can’t get out of their own way. Every time that a black doesn’t see a racist behind every rain drop or every ray of sun he’s everything but his own name and that is so sad. The history of black oppression is alined with the history of the Democratic Party but few blacks acknowledge those facts, they hid behind any and every lie that they are told and will only read books that white liberals tell them to that support that lie. We have allowed Rev Jackson and Bro Al to allow our plight in America to be related or compare to every deviant behavior know to man with zero push back, we even kill our own children to support a white women’s right to choice, now how sick is that crap. Black America for the most part have been taught the learned hopelessness of low expectations and just can or won’t find away to break that cycle and those blacks who even attempt to tell us about ourselves are salvaged, so they give up and live in silence, not wanting to make waves. I’m waiting for a day when a prominent black with plenty of money said exactly what I’m saying and when told to change his position he tells them to KMA in Macy’s store from window, the truth requires no apology or retraction and that’s my view don’t like it stick it were God provides little light.

  15. ccscientist says

    One of the great ironies of politics is that those who virtue signal the loudest about minorities also support the policies that harm minorities the most. A simple example is housing. A universal of democrat controlled big cities is zoning that restricts the construction of housing. It is almost impossible to build an apartment building in San Fran these days, for example. There are so many requirements and rules, the permits are not approved, or neighbors sue before it can be built. With a restricted supply, prices go through the roof. How does this help blacks? The black population of San Fran has plummeted.
    Another example is restrictions on hair braiders, food trucks, street vendors, and other small businesses. In the name of “protecting the public” and making the city look nice, opportunities for individuals to make a living or start a small business dwindle. I used to live in the south and am quite willing to eat in a hole-in-the wall BBQ joint that isn’t that clean. With all that smoke and BBQ I have no fear of germs. But you won’t find places like that in big cities–you need to spend a million to open a nice place in order to meet the regs. Or how about a lady who does hair in her living room? Forbidden.

  16. Michael Smith says

    The title of the article is The Infantilization of Black America. The origin of the word infant is from Latin infant- ‘unable to speak. We blacks are not a monolithic community. All should be able “to speak” and be heard from Ta Nehisi to Dak Prescott to Coleman Hughes. One of the biggest arguments touted in support of diversity and inclusionin the workplace is that diversity of thought leads to better decision making. If this is what we ask of the majority population, why should it not make sense for our own community? It’s sad that black progressives shout down black conservatives as uncle toms and black conservatives criticize black progressives as pawns to the Democratic party. Useful and productive ideas can come both ends of our ideological spectrum. Let’s stop fighting among ourselves and have more grown up conversations about how to build on what’s working for us, and less about what’s not. Black median household income growth increased faster than white income in 2016. http://www.insidesources.com/black-workers-surpass-races-wage-growth/
    Why did that happen, what lessons can be learned and applied, and how can we make it grow even faster, for more of our people?

  17. BFF says

    This is an interesting piece. I’m a white Leftist, so the author and I seem to have different political points of view.

    But I certainly agree with him that many liberals and progressives (and not just white ones) often make the mistake of viewing black people in the United States as a political monolith – Reid, Dyson, and others often engage in this. There’s a definitely a tendency to link being black with progressive/liberal points of view which is just not the case in a lot of instances. The flip side of that is linking being white with having conservative and/or right-wing points of view, which is also fallacious.

    Even among black Leftists, there is ideological diversity. For example, Adolph Reed is a professor of African-American politics at University of Pennsylvania and a long-time activist who argues that folks that you mentioned like Joy Ann-Reid and Michael Eric Dyson are actually located on the left side of a “bipartisan neoliberalism” but are not actually emblematic of an egalitarian political Left. His argument in “Black Politics After 2016” is that this “neoliberal Left” tendency to reduce people to identity categories becomes a way of avoiding addressing economic inequality, health care injustice, and other programs typically associated with a political Left – https://nonsite.org/article/black-politics-after-2016

    Another interesting writer I recommend is Tasha Philpot. She has a book out called “Conservative but Not Republican: The Paradox of Party Identification and Ideology among African Americans.” It examines how some black voters vote for Democratic politicians despite being ideologically conservative on some issues.

    I also think it’s interesting that the public makes the Democratic party synonymous with progressive points of view because it really does not have a good track record on a number of issues. The majority of mainstream Democrats were opposed to same-sex marriage ten years ago and had hardly anything to say about LGBTQ issues. At one point, Hillary Clinton advocated “building a wall” across the southern US border much like the current president has. Bernie Sanders voted against immigration reform in 2007. Barack Obama made some dog whistle remarks about Mexican immigrants on the campaign trail back in 2008. Clinton and Obama were both heavily indebted to Wall Street. Bernie Sanders voted against gun control legislation.

    I’ve grown so tired of the amnesia and the knee-jerk opinions that have come out as a result of the 2016 election. When 42 percent of the eligible population did not vote and only 26.5 percent of the eligible voting population voted for the person currently holding office, how can you make any broad generalizations about who voted for what?

    • I appreciate your thoughtful remarks. I’m curious however about how an issue like building a wall along a troubled section of our border as a basic security measure cannot be considered progressive.

      • BFF says

        To me, “constructing a wall” sounds more like an assumption that immigrants are criminals than a basic security measure. In my opinion, the current rhetoric around that proposal foments nativist tendencies, plays into an “Us versus Them” narrative, and pits people who were born in the United States against immigrants. I think that we haven’t done enough work to reform our immigration system, but I, respectfully, think that building a wall is a really harsh and divisive tactic. As a political Leftist, I was disappointed to see Hillary Clinton participating in that rhetoric during the 2008 campaign and to find out that Bernie Sanders voted against immigration reform in 2007.

        However, I know that other people on Quillete might think differently than I do on immigration; and I respect that.

  18. While I can appreciate all of the sincere comments made here, I have to say that most, if not all of you are overthinking it.

    While black culture isn’t “monolithic” by any means, a great majority of it suffers from the same problems such as an extraordinary amount of single mothers, rampant substance abuse, etc.

    What needs to take place is a paradigm shift in the form of culture change. All of the so called “black leaders” on the left need to start preaching on subjects such as how to set, and achieve goals, how to build wealth, how to study, etc.

    Until then, ain’t nuthin’ gonna change.

    You can take that to the effing bank.

  19. John Samsonite says

    This is perfect. Bravo. The world is changing my LLLOOORRDDD.. the world is changing… and these new American leaders are perhaps the most well-prepared set we’ve ever had to defend against encroaching leftist totalitarianism. They are seizing their historic opportunity, and while they will face INTENSE short-term pressure and hatred, they will ultimately be well-served by their courageous choice.

    MAGA.

  20. phil the b says

    “but because of the perceived racial attitudes of Republicans…”

    PERCEIVED? LOL. This can be backed up by data (from a plethora of sources). It’s hard to take this entire thing seriously when you have an entire paragraph that is full of shit.

  21. Charlos says

    Legalize/Decriminalize ALL drugs and a lot of the gang war incentive vanishes. Ditto to the Mexican drug cartel MS -13 hysteria. Until we realize that some people just want to alter their consciousness sometimes, we’ll never figure this shit out.

    • I think you are wrong about this. Experience shows that criminality is endemic in the population and not an epiphenominal of criminal codes. Basically, this just means that criminals will ALWAYS find objects of criminality even if you remove drugs. Leftists have the hardest time understanding that there is a segment of the population for whom criminality is a meaningful way of life — removing drugs from the picture is not going to make these people reevaluate their way of life.

      • Bill says

        Is it ironic they want to decriminalize drugs to stop the racist incarceration but at the same time want to add even more stringent firearms ownership laws which is also part of that racist incarceration? To your point about gangs will just find something else, consider that if you decriminalize drugs you remove a stream of income from the gangs. They will likely turn to strong arm robbery or other illicit means to replace that revenue stream. They aren’t going to go “wow, drugs are legal now…let’s sit around without any money or means to differentiate our status!” Maybe they’ll start having those dance-off fights featured in numerous movies in the 1980s. I’m certain they’ll give up violence in preference to cool dance moves and pop-n-lock.

    • Harland0 says

      Gangs would just find another illegal product to traffic. It’s what gangs do.

  22. Also, one point that requires more emphasis is the fact that block voting along racial lines makes a given minority predictable and ultimately vulnerable to manipulation by elites. Block voting works in the short term but ends up screwing you over in the long term once politicians learn that the black vote can be taken for granted. Whites are the only ones who split their vote at an even enough ratio to keep politicians on their toes. Native Americans in several states have also been good about splitting their vote, though not so good in other states.

    The moral is to not vote in such a way that it can be predicted based on racial characteristics. It’s a setup for exploitation and manipulation.

  23. Bill Poulos says

    It’s difficult for any person to have pride and self-respect when their strongest self-image is that of a victim.

  24. We live in a society now that celebrates victim hood as a virtue OVER and at the expense of virtues such as courage, self reliance, and mastery. Evidence? Safe spaces, anti-bullying codes, identity politics, intersectionality, toxic masculinity… on and on and on.

    If you don’t want your children to be indoctrinated with this garbage, you will want to be VERY selective about what public school you send them to or simply home school. Educators are spending increasing amount of classroom time on social justice themes that celebrate victim hood and discourage independence of thought and action.

    Cultural marxism took over our public education system. While we weren’t watching we silently lost a whole generation who now thinks a murderous political ideology like socialism is cool and trendy. How did this happen? There is literally no other political ideology that has been more discredited by its outcomes than socialism, yet here we are, having to make arguments against it, as if the 100 plus million bodies that piled up as a result of it is not enough.

    • Michael Cameron says

      Agreed about the celebration of victimhood. Among the most egregious examples are the Sam Harrises and Jordan Petersons of the world, who wither at any suggestions of PC. They are the most delicate of snowflakes.

  25. Pingback: Let's Review 111: Is the West Burning? - American Digest

  26. Frances says

    Back in the day, grew up in a largely white, though culturally diverse (think Doukhbor, Italian, German, Chinese, Scots, etc., etc.) community. But though our particular community did not include blacks in those days, we still heard about them. Our spellers, on each page, featured someone worthy of recognition. So that is how I learned about George Washington Carver and others. So I grew up assuming blacks could achieve just as much as any other race.

    Have gone a long way down the road since those days; have worked with persons of colour. One person really great; another really lazy and very much inclined to do the minimum required and then have the client return (this is doing taxes) when he wasn’t there so someone else could clean up the mess but he would get the recognition for that client. Took our office a couple of weeks, but we all figured it out: his clients would have to come to him – and him only – to be finalized. It wasn’t racism, it was recognition that he was playing us for fools; we’d have spoken sooner and been harder on a white person.

    So, au fond, I will still meet anyone of whatever colour and – depending on the circumstances – be friendly. Whatever the failings of Dr Martin Luther King Jr,, I still heartily endorse his wish that his children – and, by extension, all people “…will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”.

  27. Reluctant Republican white girl here.
    Believe it or not, Republican whites (Actually a lot of us are interracial families, particularly the Christian ones) are just as diverse in opinion class, ethnic and immigrant background as blacks who vote Democrat. You just won’t hear about it, because we are quiet. We don’t use our families and friends and experiences to counter the DNC’s “Narrative”. It goes against our sensibility that proving that we have “Black friends” is wrong, and being genuine in our relationships is more important than whether we offend people (Especially people who don’t know us enough to form an informed judgment about what we said or believe). Characteristically, we Republicans/Conservatives don’t identify as such so intrinsically, as Progressives. Our political identity isn’t as essential/central to steering our sense of self or moral code as strongly as other things we find closer to our search for life’s meaning. Like Evangelical Christian or Jewish or Muslim or Agnostic or Intellectural or Italian or Catholic or Southern or Baptist or Immigrant or Latino or Mayan or Gay or Odd-Independent-Thinker or Handicapped or Mother (Most of these examples are from my actual social circles). Our understanding of the world is informed on a deeper level by many other things – usually not American politics per se.

    Oh, and we do stand up against racism, in ourselves and in life. But we don’t typically get heard politically and we don’t care to. Perhaps we should.

    No one who believes all Republicans are a monolithic block of racist enemies is going to care at all about this post. But I want it on the record all the same.

  28. josh says

    I’m all for not treating black people, or even worse, “the black experience” as monolithic. I also sympathize with some of Mr. Akintola’s complaint about those on the left who reduce everything to
    racism.

    That said, this sentence: “While black Americans have been voting Democrat, the wealth gap between blacks and whites has widened, with one in four black households having zero to negative net worth, and black families having $5.04 to every $100 in a white family.” and the rest of the paragraph, is a pretty bad argument. It’s like arguing that because someone with a chronic cough keeps going to the doctor, the doctor is the problem and you should instead consult the neighbor who keeps burning plastic in his yard. That black Americans have voted Democratic doesn’t mean Democratic policies have been enacted, especially at state and national levels. One has to actually look at what policies have been in play at all levels.

    For example, the 2008 financial crash is known to have disproportionately affected black Americans. The crash was caused by over-leveraged banks and predatory lending practices that are part and parcel of Republican policies. A local Democratic mayor doesn’t exactly offset that reality.

  29. I came to the conclusion many years ago that the Democrats as a party have had the same view of black people since at least the 1820s. That being that black people are helpless and wild, and can not be trusted to care for themselves. In the 1820s Dem party platforms called for the continuation of slavery as the blacks would starve to death outside that system. In the 1880s Dems called for Jim Crow segragatoin to protect whites from the suddenly freed slaves who were too wild to be trusted. By the 1930s that view began to evolve as some Dems, mostly in the larger Dem dominated cities of the north wanted to capture the dense black vote as they had with other ethnic groups. Then in the1960s the greatest disaster to befall black america since reconstruciton came from the Democratic administration of Lyndon Johnson. The Great Society was supposed to help poor people. But it unleased a chaos that continues to this day. Dem politicians and activist simply do NOT care about the devisation they helped to create. To be sure, black men and women made terrible choices; drugs, alcohol abandoning their children. But everytime someone tried to speak out, every voice that tried to warn of what was happening (see: Daniel Patrick Moynihan) was attacked and ridiculed, called racist. Even Obama was attacked by Jesse Jackson when during his campain he called on Blacks to make better decisions (Jackson said he wanted to cut his nuts off) Anyone daring to call for black people to do better for ourselves is quickly and vicouly attacked not just by white Dems (Liberals/ progressives/ democrat socialist or whatever else they call themselves) but by black activists and politcians who live off the misery of poor blacks. The bottom line is, on the left, in the Democrat party their is a powerful force at work to keep black people right where we are (living chaotic lives and voting democrat)

  30. Doug S says

    Pretty good article here and I have never heard of this guy. I have many times heard of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and locally, some guy called 2X. The media loves to report on what these guys say. It is inflammatory and shocking. They speak of rage and all sorts of injustices.

    I read a story about a young woman that was running for office somewhere. She was asked how she was known enough to be able to run and she said it started when she attended some convention with a couple of friends and they claimed to be some group, Reporters were interviewing people and she happened to be interviewed. The reporter thought that she was interesting and would make for a good news clip. She told other reporter friends about this young woman and they saw an opportunity for an easy story and she got more interviews. Eventually, political people contacted her to run for office.

    This story made me think that this is how “black leaders” get that status. Individuals say things that are shocking and the media eats it up and reports on the claims of injustice and anger and these few eventually become called “leaders” by the media. I am sure there was never a black leader election where these people were chosen. The media chose them for their abilities to make headlines. What this guy said here is in a way shocking to what the mainstream, stereotypical concept of what blacks are all about, but he doesn’t propose violence in the streets and claims that like those horrible white people that are keeping the blacks down and crap like that which the media loves to sell.

    I sure would never consider voting for the likes of Barry Obummer, but maybe this guy because he actually speaks sense.

    I do think that the Democrats are also much to blame here. I recently read an article where a guy mentioned how that organizations that offer protection find it in their own interest to make sure the problems they protect against never go away. I think the Democrat party has much gotten into the protection game where they constantly claim that there are groups of victims and they never are treated justly and therefore they should support the Democrats who are protecting them. They benefit from the problem never going away, always getting worse, always a new way to claim their “children” are being wronged.

  31. Michael Cameron says

    Odd that the among all of the supposed failures of Democrats to help African-Americans, the author fails to point out that Obamacare has reduced the numbers of uninsured black citizens by 1/3. The great society programs of the 60’s were also of enormous benefit, not to mention a raft of legislation since to reduce racism in employment, housing, etc. And, every time I turn on CNN, there is a black Trump supporter on the panel to present balance. The author takes cherry-picking to new heights.

Comments are closed.