Anyone want to discuss this excerpt from James Taranto?
There is more to a black person’s life than the way he is treated by the government or by whites. When one considers the social problems that have beset the black community since the civil rights era–the decline of marriage and rise of illegitimacy, drug abuse, the shockingly high incarceration rate for young black men–it’s not hard to imagine that many blacks might be nostalgic for the relative social stability of 50 to 60 years ago, as distinct from the undeniably oppressive political regime.
As for women, their “liberation” has been considerably more ambiguous. The sexual revolution and feminism are undeniably liberating for women who are sexually adventurous and professionally ambitious. But what about women who don’t fit that description? The life of a chaste homemaker/mother may not be for every woman, but it is for some, and a combination of social and economic pressures makes it much more difficult to realize than it was half a century ago.
As a white male, I thought maybe someone else should take the first shot at this.
Reminds me of the playground bully when you’re a kid who takes your hand and hits you in your own face with it, mocking you with “why do you keep hitting yourself, huh?”.
As a woman, I find this definition of “liberation” misrepresented/false, and so anything that follows is misrepresented/false. Only an uninformed male would think it’s about sex. How about equal pay, equal access, not having our health care issues decided by men…
I think I want to throw up. This is what makes me want to vomit.
Wow.
Speechless. Who IS this guy anyway?
https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSmqtAqw6QiGM2maUUCNDfxbQfECy7VglBM6v0NBZ_amcdz3
Y4kQA
That’s some mighty powerful “weed” this guy is smoking. He hasn’t raised his head in 50 years to see what is really going on. “It says right here in my Young Americans for Freedom newspaper….”
I don’t know, before I even tried to take Taranto seriously he’d have to introduce me to at least one of the following two types of people:
Although I will note that he’s begging the question if he assumes that the shockingly high incarceration rate for young black men has nothing whatsoever to do with how blacks are, and have been, treated by the government and whites.
And of course Taranto won’t even acknowledge that the police, in most places, still have it out for non-whites. The latest spying scandal involving the NYPD is just more proof of such.
My mother was a Phi Beta Kappa. When she graduated from college, there were two choices for her: she could become a teacher, or she could become a social worker.
My father was an honors Math Major that scored on the top 1% of the CPA Exam.
Top 1%.
He wound up working as an X-Ray technician in the local VA Hospital.
What were my parent’s crime?
They were born Black in America a generation before Brown v. Board.
So, while they lived in, what did Taranto call them?
oh yes, ‘ social stable’ communities, they were communities where a Black person was severely limited in their personal dreams and aspirations.
And, by the way, Mr. Taranto, both my parents left ‘ socially stable’ communities in the police state known as the Jim Crow South, where they, and millions of other Black folks lived in TERROR.
I will never forget the DailyKos diary written by a young Black man, talking about discussing the differences between MLK and Malcolm X. For the young man’s father, he didn’t want to hear shyt against MLK, because in this man’s eyes, this is what Martin Luther King accomplished:
” He stopped Black folk from being terrorized at will in the South. ”
Think about the power of that statement. These were American citizens, whose roots in this country probably went back over a hundred years, and they could be TERRORIZED AT WILL.
So, this late in life child of two very smart people who never got a chance to think about ‘ dreams’ and ‘careers’ very much thanks the Civil Rights Movement, and all it’s leaders and soldiers for giving me opportunities that weren’t even possible in the slightest for my older siblings.
As far as the female portion of it, I go back to my own family. My grandmother had her Masters degree by the time she married – in 1905. She and her three sisters were all educated women. Why?
Because my great-grandfather, a former slave, swore to himself, that
‘ the only children his daughters would take care of, would be THEIR OWN’.
i.e. he planned on them NEVER being Mammys.
My grandmother believed the same, and wanted the same for her four daughters, who all had their Bachelors and Masters before Brown v Board.
And, my mother believed the same for her three daughters.
So, no, I’m not interested in the ‘good old days’…cause the only people they were good for were White men.
And even then, only SOME white men.
My mom got a degree from Oberlin College in 1953 or 1954. That was and still is a fairly prestigious university. She became a nursey school teacher. She worked with Head Start in its inaugural year in Montclair, New Jersey. She later became the director of the Princeton University League Nursery School. Not a bad career, working both ends of the economic ladder. I don’t think she has any regrets. But, even as a white woman, a college degree in the 1950’s didn’t open that wide of a world of opportunities.
As a Black man I feel fairly confident in saying that a national conversation on race does nothing for the re-election prospects of the first Black president. I am perfectly fine with tabling this discussion until December…
I’m trying to write a coherent response your post, but the more I think about it, it’s hard to see anything in this beyond a bunch of all-too-familiar “gotchas” on both sides. But here goes anyway.
The phenomenon he’s writing about is real enough. I don’t think he’s saying that the civil rights movement and feminism caused it. I think he’s saying that they have not effectively responded to it. But that’s less than a half truth.
The cause of the social breakdown has been the preference of the American ruling classes for war, globalism, and unbridled profits over community. The real activists and organizers in urban communities are mostly Democrats. Many of them, if minorities, are socially conservative, and still Democrats.
I think the truth is that when it comes to the development of the civil rights or feminist movements, the GOP has contributed very little. But in addressing the problems of ordinary people, chaste or not, in this oppressive society, the GOP really does have an alternative vision. It’s called charity. In a world where they refuse to fight for justice, private charity has to trump public justice. It’s not that Democrats are against charity, it’s that they put the emphasis on justice.
I know when the right is winning on an issue: it’s when their position prevents people on the left from agreeing with the obvious.
There’s no question in my mind that everything else being equal, a stable home with two parents is better for raising a child than the alternative; that drug abuse and a high incarceration rate devastates the fabric of a community. I also believe that progress in women’s rights has unfortunately not been correlated with working women having increased options to raise their children full time in one-income homes.
But almost no one wants to concede these points out loud. I would bet that if we polled the question “Which party would you associate more with these positions?” most people would say the Republican party.
I see two reasons for this: one is because most social conservatives on the right are too odious for us to acknowledge being in agreement with. I don’t know who this Taranto character is, but the insertion of “chaste” into this discussion makes him suspect. The second is that we mistakenly believe that if we concede to their premise, we’re giving aid and comfort to their conclusions. IMO, we’ve far too long been taking positions outside of common sense and reasonable judgment.
I agree.
Well, on the one hand, I don’t see anyone saying that drug abuse and incarceration are good things. I’m also happy to concede that a stable home is best for raising a child, although I’m not sure why precisely two parents is an optimal number compared to–well, what alternative are you talking about, anyway? It’s not like there’s just one alternative.
But I think you’re missing what’s so offensive about Taranto’s comments. It’s not that he’s calling attention to certain social pathologies, it’s that he’s suggesting that these pathologies are direct and inevitable consequences of civil rights and women’s liberation. It’s that he presents it as this either/or thing, as if the only two choices for black communities are Jim Crow and crackhouses. The bigotry is what’s objectionable.
Actually, it’s true.
And nothing has done more to destabilize the black family and make it impossible for a working class woman to choose to stay home and take care of the house and kids than decades of successful Republican assault on the economic well-being of ordinary Americans.
Precisely.
He’s got a bad case of cart-before-horse going on there. If you start with the shockingly high incarceration rate for young black men, most of the other social problems he mentions inevitably follow as consequences. As long as breathing while black is considered a major felony, especially for young black men, there are going to be a lot of single parent households and all the rest.
And as for “liberated” young black women, when you’re trying to hold a family together while your significant other is doing time from something that would probably get a young white man a stern talking to, your prospects are probably not going to be all that good.
that picture is messing up my screen
Hey, man, can’t you just delete this annoying and pointless mega-spampic post?
yeah, I did. Due to its margin-busting, not’s is spaminess.
Huh. It’s still showing up, though.
yeh, showing up on my computer too.
White man fantasy is always to see himself on top just like the good old days. They do this shit with White women to a certain extent. Ask Santorum.
Back in the 50s and 60s, blacks had tremendous problems. There was, however, a black business-owning class. In Harlem, there was an entire subculture of businesses owned by blacks for blacks. That had a value. It’s no longer there.