Systemic racism in the USA: Are whites "guiltier" if they had slavery in their past?

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
How does one do that. Apparently that's not working because people don't believe it. Not anymore. No one thinks they are racist by and large. Rhats why they resent it. And unfortunately those that do think there is systemic racism hasn't been able to convince enough people. Like I said, what do you want to actually do? Keep talking about it or what things must change and how would you go about changing them. Cause you might go on talking for the next 100 years.
Why is it so important to you to paint those who believe that there is systemic racism as making an accusation of personal racism? Why is it so important to you to misrepresent it as making white kids feel personally guilty for the racism of their ancestors? Until we figure out why you really don't like the possibility that there is systemic racism we won't get anywhere.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
As I frequently say, "There is always more than one thing happening."

The "Great Recession" happened early in the century, setting Millennials back economically, with the artificially induced Covid Depression occurring before Millennials had recovered and just as Gen Z was entering college.

Social media exploded with smart phones, and most negatively, "clout chasing" began.

Critical Theory in various forms, which had been ruminating through the education system since the 80s, started to have its negative effects in the workplace.

The effects of three generations of Radical Feminism in the black urban areas reached peak, with more than 70% of black children born to unwed mothers whose mothers and grandmothers had been mostly unwed.
Odd sort of thing to blame on radical feminism.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,447
20,399
US
✟1,496,033.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Odd sort of thing to blame on radical feminism.
It was, very specifically, Radical Feminism (capitalized because it is a specific ideology) that introduced the concept of women not needing fathers in the home to raise children. It was novel....up until then black marriage rates had been actually higher than white marriage rates. That concept was so quickly and broadly accepted in black urban areas by the 80s (I was in Washington DC at the time and noticed it among even young black women with government jobs) that CBS and ABC did news specials on the phenomenon. Vice-President Quail even did a press conference on the phenomenon.

I can hypothesize reasons why black women gravitated toward it, reasons that go back to slavery and Jim Crow. But it happened and it had a very specific origin.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: jacks
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,447
20,399
US
✟1,496,033.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why is it so important to you to paint those who believe that there is systemic racism as making an accusation of personal racism? Why is it so important to you to misrepresent it as making white kids feel personally guilty for the racism of their ancestors? Until we figure out why you really don't like the possibility that there is systemic racism we won't get anywhere.
Because "systemic racism" has been explained as the results of actions by individuals rather than the "structural racism" (written laws and economic policies) of the past. And all the attempts of correcting "systemic racism" basically boil down to "You think wrong and need re-education."
 
  • Agree
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Because "systemic racism" has been explained as the results of actions by individuals rather than the "structural racism" (written laws and economic policies) of the past. And all the attempts of correcting "systemic racism" basically boil down to "You think wrong and need re-education."
It wasn't explained to me that way, and although I don't really know all that much about it I can see that if that's what you think it is, then I get that you might not like it. Do you also think that systemic racism as a concept also requires white people to feel personal guilt for the racism of their ancestors?
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
It was, very specifically, Radical Feminism (capitalized because it is a specific ideology) that introduced the concept of women not needing fathers in the home to raise children. It was novel....up until then black marriage rates had been actually higher than white marriage rates. That concept was so quickly and broadly accepted in black urban areas by the 80s (I was in Washington DC at the time and noticed it among even young black women with government jobs) that CBS and ABC did news specials on the phenomenon. Vice-President Quail even did a press conference on the phenomenon.

I can hypothesize reasons why black women gravitated toward it, reasons that go back to slavery and Jim Crow. But it happened and it had a very specific origin.
The human race will continue to reproduce itself even if women can't find suitable husbands for long term partnerships. "Radical feminism" is just an excuse for something that was happening anyway. If you want to know what kick-started the trend, it's the "no man in the house" rule for welfare programs. But the real cause is not "Radical feminism" but the lack of suitable husbands.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,447
20,399
US
✟1,496,033.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It wasn't explained to me that way, and although I don't really know all that much about it I can see that if that's what you think it is, then I get that you might not like it. Do you also think that systemic racism as a concept also requires white people to feel personal guilt for the racism of their ancestors?
People who make a living pushing racism as a continuing and serious issue have run into a problem: The Jim Crow laws and policies of "structural racism" have been almost completely eliminated. Yet, there continues to be disparities between races, particularly the poor showing among many black people. They are calling this social disparity "systemic racism."

Certainly, there are disparities, and certainly an obvious characteristic of the disparities is race. But is it race-ism? And I think we have to look at conditions prior to 2000, because racial acerbations have occurred since then, some deliberate.

There are issues among black people that don't get widely discussed, mostly because black people fear what the white majority will do with the information...although a lot of it is visible in black social media.

One thing, for instance, is that there has always been multiple distinct black cultures for hundreds of years, although the mass media concentrates only on the ghetto black culture.

Two hundred years ago, there was a Freedman culture established in the North East and a black slave culture on the southern Atlantic coast. These were distinct (there was also the tiny Geechee-Gullah culture that remains distinct to this day). As slavery along the Gulf Coast states the slave culture bifurcated: The Atlantic Coast slave culture was slightly but different from the Gulf Coast slave culture. That was because the slave owners were themselves of different cultures and managed their slaves differently. Bluntly, the South Atlantic coast slaveholders were more aristocratic than the Gulf Coast slaveholders, and that was reflected in the cultures of their slaves.

A parenthetical point: Black people who can trace their linages though Atlantic Coast slavery are often able to track those lineages all the way back to the point their first African ancestors arrived in America. That was because those slaveholders often kept careful breeding records (as they did with horses). And for that same reason, there is much less Caucasian admixture among those black Americans.

OTOH, black people of the Gulf Coast culture are rarely able to track their lineage prior to the Civil War. And the Caucasian admixture is much more frequent among those blacks because careful breeding was of less concern and rape of black women by slaveholders was much more common.

One hundred years ago, the situation changed again as the Great Northern Migration began and black people--mostly descendances of the Gulf Coast slave culture--moved northward. They swallowed up the pre-existing Freedman culture in the north.

In the meantime, the Atlantic Coast black culture remained distinctive. Have you seen the movie "Hidden Figures?" That movie depicted the Atlantic Coast black culture. That is a view rarely seen in American media, particularly today. However, that culture was the engine behind the Civil Rights Movement.

I personally noted the clash between those cultures myself as a young boy in the early 60s. I had been raised in the Atlantic Coast culture (which wasn't completely confined to the coast...culture is a choice). When we visited some distant relatives in south Chicago, I underwent an extreme cultural shock probably barely less than if I'd been white and dropped into that neighborhood. Compared to the way I was raised, that culture was vulgar, violent, and chaotic.

White media had mostly ignored black people until the mid-60s. When I was a boy, there were scores of magazines, practically every city of any size had a black newspaper, all by blacks for blacks. We managed our own image. After the Civil Rights Act, white corporations had "cover" to market to black consumers without being labeled a "black company." White media goes where advertising goes, so white media in NYC and LA also suddenly discovered black people existed in America.

The problem, though, is that they didn't look any further than their own ghettos for examples of black people. What they saw in their ghettos was the Gulf Coast slave culture that had migrated to the north....and that image has been broadcast so widely since the 60s that the culture you saw in "Hidden Figures" is hard to see.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
People who make a living pushing racism as a continuing and serious issue have run into a problem: The Jim Crow laws and policies of "structural racism" have been almost completely eliminated. Yet, there continues to be disparities between races, particularly the poor showing among many black people. They are calling this social disparity "systemic racism."

Certainly, there are disparities, and certainly an obvious characteristic of the disparities is race. But is it race-ism? And I think we have to look at conditions prior to 2000, because racial acerbations have occurred since then, some deliberate.

There are issues among black people that don't get widely discussed, mostly because black people fear what the white majority will do with the information...although a lot of it is visible in black social media.

One thing, for instance, is that there has always been multiple distinct black cultures for hundreds of years, although the mass media concentrates only on the ghetto black culture.

Two hundred years ago, there was a Freedman culture established in the North East and a black slave culture on the southern Atlantic coast. These were distinct (there was also the tiny Geechee-Gullah culture that remains distinct to this day). As slavery along the Gulf Coast states the slave culture bifurcated: The Atlantic Coast slave culture was slightly but different from the Gulf Coast slave culture. That was because the slave owners were themselves of different cultures and managed their slaves differently. Bluntly, the South Atlantic coast slaveholders were more aristocratic than the Gulf Coast slaveholders, and that was reflected in the cultures of their slaves.

A parenthetical point: Black people who can trace their linages though Atlantic Coast slavery are often able to track those lineages all the way back to the point their first African ancestors arrived in America. That was because those slaveholders often kept careful breeding records (as they did with horses). And for that same reason, there is much less Caucasian admixture among those black Americans.

OTOH, black people of the Gulf Coast culture are rarely able to track their lineage prior to the Civil War. And the Caucasian admixture is much more frequent among those blacks because careful breeding was of less concern and rape of black women by slaveholders was much more common.

One hundred years ago, the situation changed again as the Great Northern Migration began and black people--mostly descendances of the Gulf Coast slave culture--moved northward. They swallowed up the pre-existing Freedman culture in the north.

In the meantime, the Atlantic Coast black culture remained distinctive. Have you seen the movie "Hidden Figures?" That movie depicted the Atlantic Coast black culture. That is a view rarely seen in American media, particularly today. However, that culture was the engine behind the Civil Rights Movement.

I personally noted the clash between those cultures myself as a young boy in the early 60s. I had been raised in the Atlantic Coast culture (which wasn't completely confined to the coast...culture is a choice). When we visited some distant relatives in south Chicago, I underwent an extreme cultural shock probably barely less than if I'd been white and dropped into that neighborhood. Compared to the way I was raised, that culture was vulgar, violent, and chaotic.

White media had mostly ignored black people until the mid-60s. When I was a boy, there were scores of magazines, practically every city of any size had a black newspaper, all by blacks for blacks. We managed our own image. After the Civil Rights Act, white corporations had "cover" to market to black consumers without being labeled a "black company." White media goes where advertising goes, so white media in NYC and LA also suddenly discovered black people existed in America.

The problem, though, is that they didn't look any further than their own ghettos for examples of black people. What they saw in their ghettos was the Gulf Coast slave culture that had migrated to the north....and that image has been broadcast so widely since the 60s that the culture you saw in "Hidden Figures" is hard to see.
That is interesting. I got into it a little because I am a Civil War navy buff living in eastern NC. There were a number of free blacks involved in shipping and fisheries along the coast who were thrown out of work by the blockade. The Confederate navy, being perennially short of experienced seamen, was happy to enlist them as such. The navy wound up being about 20% black.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,447
20,399
US
✟1,496,033.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The human race will continue to reproduce itself even if women can't find suitable husbands for long term partnerships. "Radical feminism" is just an excuse for something that was happening anyway. If you want to know what kick-started the trend, it's the "no man in the house" rule for welfare programs. But the real cause is not "Radical feminism" but the lack of suitable husbands.

The primary such welfare program was Aid to Families with Dependent Children, which was passed in 1936 during the Great Depression. The purpose of the program was to keep white mothers out of the Depression-era work force where they would have been in competition with their own husbands and other men. Although it was a federal program, it was administered by the states. Black mothers were excluded from AFDC in many states because they were already considered an important part of the work force...and it was intended that they remain in the work force.

In the early 60s--prior to the Great Society programs of the Johnson Administration--the federal government had already pressured those states into giving AFDC access to black mothers. That was when some states applied the "no man in the house" rule. It was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1969...so it had existed for a only few years in only a handful of states.

When I was in high school in the latter 60s, I lived in an all-black middle-class neighborhood. A few of us boys were talking about girls and sex one afternoon, and the ending notes of that discussion was a strong acknowledgement that we didn't dare get any of the neighborhood girls pregnant because that would result in a two-shotgun wedding. Our own fathers (and all the families in the neighborhood had fathers in the home) would be just as insistent on marriage as the girl's father. In my high school years, there were no unwed mothers. None. There was one girl rumored to have gotten pregnant, but she did that "went away to live with her aunt" thing....so that was never confirmed.

Point is: Through the 60s and into the 70s, black women still considered being married of paramount importance and that being an unwed mother was a shame.

The "I don't need a man" push was started by Radical Feminists (including Gloria Steinem, editor of "Ms" magazine) and was very much a different ideology. What happened in the 80s was that even middle-class women began deliberately having children out of wedlock...deliberately eschewing marriage. That's why the Vice-President spoke publicly about it. That's why new specials were produced about it.

Black women grabbed that ball and ran with it, and to a great extent because from slavery through Jim Crow, the laws and policies of the US had made it very difficult to maintain black families. However, it was only Radical Feminism that erased the ethic that the nuclear family should even exist. Today that condition is the primary situation in black urban ghettos: The nuclear family has been absent for three generations now, and the effects of that have become obvious.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: timothyu
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,447
20,399
US
✟1,496,033.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I found the paper from which the article was written: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1317670111#supplementary-materials.

I'd assume that the Spanish speaking people were casually dressed.

That paper mentions its own weaknesses. First, it was not able to reproduce the actual effects of migration, such as "out group" people actually moving next door as neighbors. That is more substantial a concern than perhaps the author understands, and relates to my question of how they were dressed: Did they appear to be of the same economic status as the other commuters? How many social touch points were there that could have tied them to the main group as main group members? It's almost as though the study emphasized as many differences as possible.

And even then, the negative reactions began to be ameliorated within 10 days.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
The primary such welfare program was Aid to Families with Dependent Children, which was passed in 1936 during the Great Depression. The purpose of the program was to keep white mothers out of the Depression-era work force where they would have been in competition with their own husbands and other men. Although it was a federal program, it was administered by the states. Black mothers were excluded from AFDC in many states because they were already considered an important part of the work force...and it was intended that they remain in the work force.

In the early 60s--prior to the Great Society programs of the Johnson Administration--the federal government had already pressured those states into giving AFDC access to black mothers. That was when some states applied the "no man in the house" rule. It was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1969...so it had existed for a only few years in only a handful of states.

When I was in high school in the latter 60s, I lived in an all-black middle-class neighborhood. A few of us boys were talking about girls and sex one afternoon, and the ending notes of that discussion was a strong acknowledgement that we didn't dare get any of the neighborhood girls pregnant because that would result in a two-shotgun wedding. Our own fathers (and all the families in the neighborhood had fathers in the home) would be just as insistent on marriage as the girl's father. In my high school years, there were no unwed mothers. None. There was one girl rumored to have gotten pregnant, but she did that "went away to live with her aunt" thing....so that was never confirmed.

Point is: Through the 60s and into the 70s, black women still considered being married of paramount importance and that being an unwed mother was a shame.

The "I don't need a man" push was started by Radical Feminists (including Gloria Steinem, editor of "Ms" magazine) and was very much a different ideology. What happened in the 80s was that even middle-class women began deliberately having children out of wedlock...deliberately eschewing marriage. That's why the Vice-President spoke publicly about it. That's why new specials were produced about it.

Black women grabbed that ball and ran with it, and to a great extent because from slavery through Jim Crow, the laws and policies of the US had made it very difficult to maintain black families. However, it was only Radical Feminism that erased the ethic that the nuclear family should even exist.
Yes, "radical feminism" can be used as a justification for why women don't want to actually marry a poorly educated, basically unemployable man who may have a police record just to have a baby Women will have babies, it's one of the things they do regardless of social issues. The fertility rate of young unmarried women is about the same as for young married women of similar demographics. A man can easily father a child, but he has to bring a lot more to the table if he wants to be considered qualified to be a husband and a parent.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,447
20,399
US
✟1,496,033.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, "radical feminism" can be used as a justification for why women don't want to actually marry a poorly educated, basically unemployable man who may have a police record just to have a baby

Ah...that's the particular flavor of Kool-Aid you've drunk. I'm aware of that line of propaganda.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Ah...that's the particular flavor of Kool-Aid you've drunk. I'm aware of that line of propaganda.
Your flavor of cool aid doesn't taste much better. Do you really think that young black women are so gullible that they would act against their own best interests just on the say-so of some radical white women? I live in a black neighborhood in a small southern town where employment rates are good, home ownership rates aren't terrible and most of the women are married. Nobody around here pays much attention to what white radical feminists have to say.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
2,572
1,478
81
Goldsboro NC
✟182,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Schools out, kids walking home, three boys on one side of the street, a girl on the other. One of the boys notices the girl and crosses over. She is evidently glad to see him, but the first thing she says to him is, "You want to walk with me, you pull your pants up." So he does. That's real feminism in action. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bradskii
Upvote 0

Bradskii

From little things big things grow...
Aug 19, 2018
16,804
11,362
71
Bondi
✟266,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
And even then, the negative reactions began to be ameliorated within 10 days.
Which is a good sign. But if you accept that the effects were ameliorated then you must accept that there were effects in the first place. That there was a change in how people felt was understandable. We get used to different situations. You start to think 'Hey, there's no problem here. They're just a couple of dudes going to work'.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums