Black Lives Don't Matter...

But, black lives matter was founded on the belief that some police forces in some towns don't care about black lives as much as they do white lives and that pol

The point is, is that is hypocritical when everybody knows deep down that the black community has a chronic problem with robbing and killing each other. There is an entire culture centered around that. That is why they may be targeted more than whites. That is just the truth. And every honest white person knows the cops can be just as terrible to them.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: greencmp

Hey, I'm here on ATS discussing this with generally left-minded folks like yourself because I think it matters.

I've seen some chasmic echo chambers on here that dwarf any libertarian cliques.

I'm unimpressed with racism in general so, I try to treat human behavior as just that. Having established a baseline and eliminated a variable, it is possible then to see that the destructive influence is the intervention itself, not any predilection for dependency.

That argument is straight out of "white man's burden" book of justifications.

I'm unimpressed with modern American libertarian attempts to understand human behavior. How can you blame 50 years of intervention and completely ignore the preceding four centuries of history — 300 years of chattel slavery followed by 100 years of legally sanctioned oppression, disenfranchisement and a complete lack of employment and educational opportunities?

I wonder at what arbitrary point you've established a baseline? I'll quote myself from this post in a thread just like this one entitled #AllLivesMatter:

The problem is the system hits poor blacks harder. Let me give you a brief history lesson if you'll allow it.

According to the 1900 Census data, half of black men and 35% of black women in the US, who reported an occupation, were agricultural workers. At this point, 90.1% of black folks still lived in the South (3.6% in the Northeast, 5.8% in the Midwest and a mere .5% in the West) and nearly 76% of all black families lived in rural areas (as opposed to 25% of white families) and the percentage that owned their own home was less than half of what it was for whites.

A commonly accepted method for gauging educational attainment in this period of American history would be the literacy questions from the Census. Here are the historical percentages of those aged 10 and older, living in Southern states, who were illiterate, 1880 - 1900, with black people on the left and white people on the right:

1880 76.2% - 21.5%
1890 60.7% - 14.9%
1900 48.0% - 11.7%

Not surprisingly given birth years prior to 1845, in 1900 a whopping 93.4% of Southern black women and 86.7% of Southern black men over the age of 55 were illiterate. Also from Census data, school attendance by age in 1900 (left column males black/white, right column females black/white):

Ages 6 to 13 .... 37.8%-72.2% ... 41.9%-71.9%
Ages 14 to 17 ... 26.7%-47.9% ... 36.2%-51.5%
Ages 18 to 21 .... 6.8%-10.4% .... 5.9% - 8.6%

Estimates are that in 1900, the average black man in the US earned approximately 45% of what the average white man earned. Now that we've established some baseline measures in 1900, lets track the progress of black in their struggle to reach economic (and therefore social) parity with whites going forward.

Three decades after the Civil War, segregation, racism, racial violence (thousands of lynchings for example) and a complete lack of economic opportunity led waves of blacks to emigrate from the South, seeking employment in industrialized urban centers elsewhere in the country such as Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, New York, Newark, Philadelphia/Camden, NJ, Oakland, Los Angeles, etc. In the period between about 1900 and 1930, around 1.6 million black folks migrated in what would be the first wave of the The Great Migration and the numbers of blacks in non-agricultural jobs increased drastically. For example, between 1910 and 1920 alone, the number of blacks employed in industrial sectors doubled.

You should take a moment to read that post in its entirety. It's not hard to understand how we got to where we are today and it has nothing to do with Cloward–Piven.

Slavery doesn't have squat to do with the problems facing the black community today. It is a convenient boogie man for deflecting from personal responsibility. Most of the problems the black community faces today didn't start until the late 60s when they bought into liberalism. Senator Moynihan was prophetic.

The black community's problems stem from the 75% out of wedlock birth rate that was brought on by the war on poverty and feminist convincing black women that they no longer needed a man in the house. The lack of jobs and Democrat run school systems just exacerbate the problem.

I drive through the West Side of Chicago daily. The corners are littered with basically feral young men with zero direction in their lives.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: greencmp

Hey, I'm here on ATS discussing this with generally left-minded folks like yourself because I think it matters.

I've seen some chasmic echo chambers on here that dwarf any libertarian cliques.

I'm unimpressed with racism in general so, I try to treat human behavior as just that. Having established a baseline and eliminated a variable, it is possible then to see that the destructive influence is the intervention itself, not any predilection for dependency.

That argument is straight out of "white man's burden" book of justifications.

I'm unimpressed with modern American libertarian attempts to understand human behavior. How can you blame 50 years of intervention and completely ignore the preceding four centuries of history — 300 years of chattel slavery followed by 100 years of legally sanctioned oppression, disenfranchisement and a complete lack of employment and educational opportunities?

I wonder at what arbitrary point you've established a baseline? I'll quote myself from this post in a thread just like this one entitled #AllLivesMatter:

The problem is the system hits poor blacks harder. Let me give you a brief history lesson if you'll allow it.

According to the 1900 Census data, half of black men and 35% of black women in the US, who reported an occupation, were agricultural workers. At this point, 90.1% of black folks still lived in the South (3.6% in the Northeast, 5.8% in the Midwest and a mere .5% in the West) and nearly 76% of all black families lived in rural areas (as opposed to 25% of white families) and the percentage that owned their own home was less than half of what it was for whites.

A commonly accepted method for gauging educational attainment in this period of American history would be the literacy questions from the Census. Here are the historical percentages of those aged 10 and older, living in Southern states, who were illiterate, 1880 - 1900, with black people on the left and white people on the right:

1880 76.2% - 21.5%
1890 60.7% - 14.9%
1900 48.0% - 11.7%

Not surprisingly given birth years prior to 1845, in 1900 a whopping 93.4% of Southern black women and 86.7% of Southern black men over the age of 55 were illiterate. Also from Census data, school attendance by age in 1900 (left column males black/white, right column females black/white):

Ages 6 to 13 .... 37.8%-72.2% ... 41.9%-71.9%
Ages 14 to 17 ... 26.7%-47.9% ... 36.2%-51.5%
Ages 18 to 21 .... 6.8%-10.4% .... 5.9% - 8.6%

Estimates are that in 1900, the average black man in the US earned approximately 45% of what the average white man earned. Now that we've established some baseline measures in 1900, lets track the progress of black in their struggle to reach economic (and therefore social) parity with whites going forward.

Three decades after the Civil War, segregation, racism, racial violence (thousands of lynchings for example) and a complete lack of economic opportunity led waves of blacks to emigrate from the South, seeking employment in industrialized urban centers elsewhere in the country such as Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, New York, Newark, Philadelphia/Camden, NJ, Oakland, Los Angeles, etc. In the period between about 1900 and 1930, around 1.6 million black folks migrated in what would be the first wave of the The Great Migration and the numbers of blacks in non-agricultural jobs increased drastically. For example, between 1910 and 1920 alone, the number of blacks employed in industrial sectors doubled.

You should take a moment to read that post in its entirety. It's not hard to understand how we got to where we are today and it has nothing to do with Cloward–Piven.

Slavery doesn't have squat to do with the problems facing the black community today. It is a convenient boogie man for deflecting from personal responsibility. Most of the problems the black community faces today didn't start until the late 60s when they bought into liberalism. Senator Moynihan was prophetic.

The black community's problems stem from the 75% out of wedlock birth rate that was brought on by the war on poverty and feminist convincing black women that they no longer needed a man in the house. The lack of jobs and Democrat run school systems just exacerbate the problem.

I drive through the West Side of Chicago daily. The corners are littered with basically feral young men with zero direction in their lives.

it's still related to slavery just cuz a few generations over a few hundred years is not really that far removed in the grand scheme of human history. crime will go down in Chicago and everywhere once there are more jobs, right now there is a shortage of them and black people are farther down on the list in getting them, why that is is another discussion, education, racism, yes their own laziness but show them a possible light at the end of the tunnel. they do work hard just in the underground black market with drugs, that happened before with al capons Chicago outfit, people saw money to be made and went about making it.

a reply to: theantediluvian

The federal Department of Education's creation date is a good milestone to measure the effectiveness of public education from. Public education has failed everyone since, especially minorities. Public sector unions share in the blame.

I assume you have a solution to all of this and I presume it is more intervention, is it not?

This tends to support my postulate about the failure of interventionist policies being used as evidence for the need for ever more invasive policies.

a reply to: greencmp

yeah, that is the typical liberal mantra. Government screws something up and then the answer becomes more government.

Prior to the 60s, blacks had similar marriage rates as white. Blacks also were doing well educationally as well. HBCUs were doing a phenomenal job educating blacks in-spite of the rampant racism. Blacks created businesses, etc. Served with distinction in the armed forces. In a way, segregation forced blacks to "do for self" because we had no choice. We had to excel. Thomas Sowell writes about this stuff extensively.

For slavery / racism to have been a driver in what is going on today, then logically you would expect blacks to have been worse off then than now. If the out of wedlock birthrate is 75% because of slavery and racism, why was it only in the 20s at the height of segregation and jim Crow? We can't seriously argue that racism today is more prevalent than it was then.

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
So you want people to March in protest every time a black person gets shot?

Otherwise they should change their name to, "black lives matter but only if killed by a white cop". Consistency isn't theirs or their supporter's strong point.

a reply to: Edumakated

It all starts with the schooling systems and public schools are a massive failure in our country. Black males are the worse demographic for drop out rates
You solve the majority of problems by education

maybe we should start making our teaching jobs more competitive and give people a reason to educate our future generations

As someone pointed out in the KKK thread, not all conservatives racists, but interestingly most racists happen to be conservative.

So if the "liberal left" is ruining the black community, these people are supposed to then rally to conservatives?

Just something to ponder over.

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
So you want people to March in protest every time a black person gets shot?

Seems in this day and age a lot of protests would be happening. Nobody would be able to get anything else done.

No, I want them to show 10% of the same outrage and concern.

Why riots in Baltimore and Ferguson over two street thugs, but no riots over these same thugs destroying the communities? I'd love to see a riot on the South and West Sides of Chicago where the neighborhoods drag all the thugs out into the street. They know who they are. The problem is those thugs are the sons of the people who live in the community. This is why every time one of them gets shot you have the crying grandmother talking about how he was "getting his life together".

It is no secret who the thugs, gangbangers, and dope dealers are in the community. Before we have any credibility calling for BLM when it comes to the police, we need to clean up our own sh*t if we want to be taken seriously.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Maybe we should just stop labeling stuff and start compromising and do whats best for the kids

a reply to: Edumakated So you're angry but are you sure you're angry at the right thing? Maybe you've been missing pointing fingers at the protesters and rioters. Bored? It doesn't sound like you're angry about a little kid dying. It sounds like you're mad they aren't reacting in the way you've come to call black people reacting in anger to something. Maybe its yourself you should be angry with for not realizing black communities do react, within their communities and try to solve gang violence. Even BLM does community outreach.

originally posted by: IridiumFlareMadness

But, black lives matter was founded on the belief that some police forces in some towns don't care about black lives as much as they do white lives and that pol

The point is, is that is hypocritical when everybody knows deep down that the black community has a chronic problem with robbing and killing each other. There is an entire culture centered around that. That is why they may be targeted more than whites. That is just the truth. And every honest white person knows the cops can be just as terrible to them.

Let's talk Ferguson where the entire police force was white for an almost entirely Black community, with widespread corruption and racism. we know that police force was bad and the black community there had a legitimate problem. That's why this started. That whole community didn't trust the police force and most of the community there didn't commit crimes. That's truth right there my friend.

Let's take it a step further to Las Vegas where I live with a huge Black community. nobody riots when a black person is killed by the police and crime is committed by all races here, not just black criminals. In fact someone robbed a store right next to my business yesterday...they were...of all horrors...white. But back on point, there is no riots here because the community trusts the police department here. Our police department makes an effort to interact with the community and they are diverse.

Simple really. Pay attention to what's really going on around you and turn off the radio.

Just a quick reference to the "government assistance programs have destroyed the Black community" garbage:

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.

and as far as most government benefits going to "welfare queens and thugs" ... seems that's not true either:

The study found that older people received slightly more than half of government benefits, while the nonelderly with disabilities received an additional 20 percent. Most of these benefits are not means-tested – indeed, better-paid workers get more in Social Security.

Furthermore, the study notes that politicians have shifted benefits away from the “jobless poor,” through reductions in traditional welfare, and increased benefits for working families, for example through tax credits. The government also has steadily expanded eligibility for benefit programs.

New York Times - "Who Benefits from the Social Safety Net?"

originally posted by: JDmOKI
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Maybe we should just stop labeling stuff and start compromising and do whats best for the kids

I think that attitude is a cop out, an excuse not to face ugly truths in the real world. Racists exist, prejudices exist, abuse of authority exists. Why should we downplay that these injustices exist? Just because it makes us uncomfortable to admit our biases doesn't mean we should shove our collective heads in the sand. People were bought and sold in this country less than 300 years ago, 3-4 generations of people ago. We can't expect magical change to happen overnight.

Racism, prejudice and abuse of power isn't going to go away by just plugging our ears and closing our eyes.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

What I'm saying is why does it always have to be two sides liberal, conservative. Our division as a country is causing us to be stagnant on problems such as this.

Of course all those thing exist

Got one to add to this. How about a black on black shooting at a campus in NC? WSSU is a HBCU, or Historically Black Campus or University.

journal.ijreview.com... aign=journal&utm_term=ijamerica

One kid killed, another injured. Campus locked down until 5am. Where is Al Sharpton? Where are the protests? Where are the helicopters from MSNBC trying to find the killer?

Yeah, queue crickets chirping....

a reply to: Edumakated

I'm honestly more tired of listening to Kr_zyshot defending a perfectly left party line. Good for you. ..I agree that the real problem is much more sinister and that people are not being informed via the media, of the truth. Sorry Kr_zyshot but your agenda is becoming obvious.

a reply to: Edumakated

Slavery doesn't have squat to do with the problems facing the black community today. It is a convenient boogie man for deflecting from personal responsibility. Most of the problems the black community faces today didn't start until the late 60s when they bought into liberalism. Senator Moynihan was prophetic.

The black community's problems stem from the 75% out of wedlock birth rate that was brought on by the war on poverty and feminist convincing black women that they no longer needed a man in the house. The lack of jobs and Democrat run school systems just exacerbate the problem.

I drive through the West Side of Chicago daily. The corners are littered with basically feral young men with zero direction in their lives.

While it's true that out-of-wedlock birth rates have been on the rise since the 60's, violent crime rates have been declining at the same rate that out-of-wedlock birth rates have continued to increase (both rates, across all races) so clearly out-of-wedlock births are not responsible for violent crime no matter how politically compelling that argument may be.

Under even modest scrutiny the blame feminism, blame welfare, blame unmarried mothers narrative completely collapses. I've got an appointment to attend to but I'll follow up in detail later.

a reply to: JDmOKI

Well that's human nature: classifying things.

We like to sort things and group things together. Heck, I sort all my LEGO pieces by color in separate bowls before I begin a new LEGO project. I think humans have this inborn need to classify things in order to make sense of their world.

I hear what you're saying, and in some ways agree. I don't think this is a liberal/conservative thing -- anyone can be just as guilty as anyone else.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
As someone pointed out in the KKK thread, not all conservatives racists, but interestingly most racists happen to be conservative.

So if the "liberal left" is ruining the black community, these people are supposed to then rally to conservatives?

Just something to ponder over.

Only if your definition of racist is "white person".

originally posted by: MystikMushroom


Maybe we should just stop labeling stuff and start compromising and do whats best for the kids

I think that attitude is a cop out, an excuse not to face ugly truths in the real world. Racists exist, prejudices exist, abuse of authority exists. Why should we downplay that these injustices exist? .
But,you do down play it in every single case except for "white on black". Racism is a human issue, not a white one. The left's crusade has morphed in to an anti-white racist crusade.