The Price of Black Man’s Life

Sign in Ferguson as riots erupt.

This decision seems to underscore an unwritten rule that Black lives hold no value; that you may kill Black men in this country without consequences or repercussions. This is a frightening narrative for every parent and guardian of Black and brown children, and another setback for race relations in America.”

Congressional Black Caucus head Rep. Marcia Fudge

Ninety-three percent of blacks are killed by other blacks,” Giuliani said, triggering a heated argument on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I would like to see the attention paid to that that you are paying to this.”

“Black people who kill black people go to jail,” Dyson said. “White people who are policemen who kill black people do not go to jail.”

“What about the poor black child that was killed by another black child?” Giuliani asked. “Why aren’t you protesting that?… Why don’t you cut it down so that so many white police officers don’t have to be in black areas?”

“When I become mayor, I’ll do that,” replied Dyson, exasperated.

“White police officers wouldn’t be there,” Giuliani said, “if you weren’t killing each other

Former Mayor of NYC Rudolph Giulani

Those two quotes or a variation of them pretty much encapsulate the debate about Michael Brown, Ferguson and the wider issue of blacks males, crime and the police. The issues are more complicated than those two statements assert but both are partially correct even if not exactly as the quoted intended.

The statistics for young black males are stark. Black males commit and are a victim of homicide at extremely disproportionate rate compared to White males or Asians. We can try to excuse it in a variety of ways but those facts remain. This is where the CBC head is correct, black lives have been cheapened. The acquittal of George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin case or the lack of charges by the Grand Jury in the Michael Brown case did not demonstrate that Blacks lives are cheaper, this has been demonstrated for years by ignoring the rampant deaths of thousands of Blacks at the hand of other Blacks for years.

Black people around the country are rioting for the last two days and had been holding protest since August because of the Michael Brown shooting by Officer Darren Wilson but have been silent for the 136 homicide victims in the St. Louis area.  Just last October 19th siblings, 35-year-old Margaree Dixson and 29-year-old Jermaine Jones, were killed by gunshot 2 hours and a few blocks apart.  They were homicide victims number 109 and 110, in a little over month almost 20 other homicides have been committed, few of these ever get solved.

A local news station reported last week that 73% of the more that 136 homicides this year remain open.  A case remains open until an arrest is made but in cases where arrests were made only 8% was there an actual conviction, last year. The same story is repeated nationwide in NYC, LA, New Orleans, around the country.  This is a problem, it not just that Black lives are cheap, is that no one wants to come forward and identify the perpetrators, and they know this. As Nicole Rice, the sister of the two siblings killed explains in the interview:

No answers, no answers, all my answers are to God, I don’t know nothing, I know people talk, and I have clues to what their talking about,” Rice said. I don’t blame the police because they’re doing everything they can do to find out what’s going on, If anyone knows anything, just what you heard, that would give a motive, It goes back to my little niece, well she’s really my cousin, but i call her my niece and her murder has never been solved so you ask me if my brother rand my sisters will be? No. Because no one will talk.

“Snitches get stitches” as DeAndre Joshua, 20 found out he was shot and killed on the first night of rioting. His body was found inside his car, which had also been set on fire. Though no official confirmation has been made, DeAndre fit the description of one of the witnesses that provided testimony to the Grand Jury that heard the evidence in Michael Brown’s case. He is also a close friend of the other person that was accompanying Brown that day, Dorian Johnson. Regardless of whether this was related to any testimony he may have provided or just a victim of opportunity for someone with a grudge against him, he has become just another statistic that will be forgotten in the aftermath of the Riots.

Ms. Fudge is correct that Black lives have been cheapened, they are continually being cheapened everytime that the community hides their criminals from justice. They are cheapened everytime that a riot is started because someone broke their monopoly on killing blacks. Especially when that person was in the act of committing a felony which led to their death. Black lives are cheapened when they excuse all wrong doing by blaming race, poverty or the “white establishment” for every ill in their communities. Children are held to a higher standard of conduct than the one of  many black criminals.

When the Black community celebrates and elevates a petty criminal like Michael Brown, or Trayvon Martin it only ensures that other young Black youths will follow in those footsteps. It also means that because they have been convinced that the law devalues them that they will continue to ignore the law and this never ending cycle will continue. The CBC and Ms. Fudge know this, that is why they are trying as they have done with the Educational system by trying to establish a separate system of grading and disciplining Black students to downgrade aberrant or illegal behaviour.

David P, Goldman describes what is happening with the CBC and the new civil rights movement as follows:

To restate the “civil rights” argument in a clearer way: Young black men are disproportionately imprisoned. One in three black men have gone to prison at some time in their life. According to the ACLU, one in fifteen black men are incarcerated, vs. one in 106 white men. That by itself is proof of racism; the fact that these individuals were individually prosecuted for individual crimes has no bearing on the matter. All that matters is the outcome. Because the behavior of young black men is not likely to change, what must change is the way that society recognizes crime itself. The answer is to remove stigma of crime attached to certain behavior, for example, physical altercations, petty theft, and drug-dealing on a certain scale. The former civil rights movement no longer focuses its attention on supposedly ameliorative social spending, for example, preschool programs for minority children, although these remain somewhere down the list in the litany of demands. What energizes and motivates the movement is the demand that society redefine deviancy to exclude certain classes of violent as well as non-violent felonies.

Which brings us to the quote by Giulani, perhaps ironically is the fact the CBC ( Congressional Black Caucus) were instrumental in pushing for passing legislation that called for more cops and stricter mandatory sentences in the late ’80’s and early 90’s.  During those days crime was rampant, drugs and gang warfare was taking a terrible toll on the communities that they represented. In those days the cries where not about police brutality (though it did exist), but for more cops, tougher sentences, loosening of forfeiture laws. The laws that were passed then did have their intended effect, crime now is at the lowest levels in 40 years but had an unintended effect of targeting criminals which were disproportianately Blacks young males.

Rather than addressing the causes of why young Black males are committing more crime, the civil rights movement and the CBC kept blaming racism and the Establishment for the failures of their own community to address this problem. They still ignore the issue, instead they elevate the violent assaults of Trayvon Martin and Martin Brown  as noble young black male martyrs.

Michael Brown assaulted a police officer and attempted to remove his gun,  what purpose does the supporter of Brown think he was trying to do this? If, this is true do you really want that person in your neighborhood, if attacking a police officer is not out of bounds for him, do you think that attacking someone else would have been? The answer I get when these questions are posed is that he was unarmed and did not deserve to die for stealing cigarillos, but this does not answer the question is just deflects it and since most do not have to live in Michael Brown’s neighborhood it would not affect them either way.

Golda Meir the former Prime Minister of Israel once said about the Palestinian and Israeli conflict:

Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us (the Jews).

In many ways the Arab and Israeli conflict is a metaphor for the issues that afflict the Black community. A day will come when Blacks will love their children enough and value their lives enough to stop accepting violent or illegal behaviour as normal and start addressing those issues in their communities. When they realize that all Black lives matter, not just those few that die at the hands of non-Blacks and stop excusing themselves of the problem.

Here’s Police Chief of Milwakee-Police Chief Edward Flynn on the subject.

 

 

Advertisements

By Hook (race card) or by Crook (cheating)

Once again elections are upon us, and we are again faced with the decision of which way the country will head. If you want to know why so many Americans are repulsed by politics or politicians all you have to do is look at what is happening during this election and feel disgusted. This is something that extends to both parties, Democrat and Republican, though in this one is seems like the Democrats who are facing an uphill battle are pulling no punches in their underhandedness.

By CROOK:

This election the Democrats are in a particularly hard battle to retain the Senate. To many contests with many in States that are normally Republican held areas. Many rode the Obama wave election in 2008 into office but now it is the same Obama Administration that has put them in a bind. As the Administration continues to go from blunder to blunder the fortunes of those seeking re-election get worse, and are not helped by Obama who keeps inserting himself into the campaigns of the beleaguered Senators, whether they want him to or not.

For those Senators who are trying to distance themselves from the Obama Administration and their many “blunders”, what Obama said just the other day in Sharpton’s Radio show could not have come at a worse time.

“The bottom line is though, these are all folks who vote with me; they have supported my agenda in Congress; they are on the right side of minimum wage; they are on the right side of fair pay; they are on the right side of rebuilding our infrastructure; they’re on the right side of early childhood education.”

“These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me, and I tell them, I said, ‘You know what, you do what you need to do to win. I will be responsible for making sure our voters turn out.’ ”

Talk about a cynical statement, not only is Obama saying that these Senators are with him and by extension share responsibility for his policies but also telling them that it is fine if they LIE to the electorate on their positions or opposition to the President to get elected. Once elected they will come back into the fold and continue as before. Of course, lying about positions and policies is something that the President is intimately acquainted with; you can keep your doctor, Syria red-line, not my decision to remove troops from Iraq, not a smidgen of corruption in the IRS, etc.

In Kansas, the Democrats had their candidate bow out of the election when it became clear that their candidate would lose against the Republican incumbent Senator Pat Roberts.   Greg Orman the Independent candidate a longtime Democrat operative running as an independent was sure to split the vote with the Democratic candidate but was a stronger opponent than Chad Taylor, who won his party’s nomination on the primary. Though Kansas law said that a candidate withdrawn after the primary had to be replaced by the party committee, the Democrat Party choose not to run any candidate in order to give Orman a better chance at defeating Roberts.

Is not just national elections that have their share of underhandedness, in Nevada for instance in a race for State Assembly #34 a candidate who was disqualified from running for not meeting the residency requirements but whose name will still on the ballot, could be seated if she wins, anyway.  The candidate Meghan Smith has been for the past 2 elections a politician in search of a seat. In 2010 she ran in a Republican leaning district and lost. In 2012 she ran in a different district in a Democrat leaning one but lost in the primary-her opponent won her seat. This year an open seat in District #34 produced an opportunity, thing was that she did not live on District #34.

On January 30th she instructed her Realtor to find her a residence within the boundaries of the district but with the deadline of February 12th fast approaching time was of the essence. A condo in the edges of the district was found the next day and negotiations were begun. Before she had even bought the property she proceeded to the state DMV office to get her address changed to the property which was not hers, yet.  She also filed paperwork to run for this seat with the Secretary of State.

Ms. Smith finally purchased the property and moved in March 7th, almost a full month past the residency requirement proscribed by Nevada law. She won the Democratic primary by 15 votes and was set to face the Republican challenger. The Republican challenger sued to have her declared ineligible and won in court after the Judge found in the Republican challenger’s favor. This might be a Pyrrhic victories of sorts, because of the time it took to adjudicate the lawsuit, Meghan Smith’s name will remain in the ballot and Nevada law allows the State Assembly to pick a replacement for disqualified candidates. This means that the Assembly which is controlled by Democrats could name Ms. Smith to the seat, though she was disqualified from the election for not meeting residency requirements. Continued next page.

Indulgences, forgiveness and moral excuses

Progressives see religion, especially Christianity with disdain. The see those who follow religion as superstitious ignoramuses who are either mislead or worse Conservatives. But for all the disdain and loathing that Progressives aim at the religious they sure like to misuse and misinterpret religious doctrine for themselves.

Take the use of indulgences, what are indulgences? From the Vatican site:

“An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.”

“An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.” Indulgences may be applied to the living or the dead.

In Medieval times indulgences were paid to the Catholic Church to wipe/minimize or atone for the sins committed during their lifetime. This doctrine as with many others got corrupted to the point the indulgences were sold to the highest bidder. Doing penance for your sins, if you could build a new wing to the cathedral an official certificate would be given for your penance. Your parents are long dead but they may not have been able to receive last rites or a confession to be absolved of their sins before dying, you could now pay or buy an indulgence for them and spare them the suffering in purgatory or in some cases Hell.

A Crisis of Words, what about the Children

The downing of the Malaysian plane MH-17 and the Israeli offensive in Gaza have finally pushed immigration from the headlines, it is a good time to examine the “crisis” its origins, the public reaction and the use by member of the main parties to game the controversy.

Immigration reform like many other subjects in American politics, is one that emote great anguish on both sides of the political spectrum. Those on the left see any abortion legislation that in any way limits abortion as if abortion is being abolished and a War on Women. Similarly the reaction to the Hobby Lobby decision brought about some of the dumbest, ignorant and ill-informed commentary from the MSM, the immigration debate does that to the Right.

Let me begin by saying that the notion that 57,000 UAC (unaccompanied alien children) coming into the US will somehow cause some massive disruption that will bankrupt some local governments is ludicrous. In the aftermath of the Haiti Earthquake 60,000 refugees came to the US. 38,000 of them settled in the Miami area. Unlike up to 85% of the UACs which are reunited with parents or relatives already here, most the refugees from Haiti, came with the clothes on their back and needed placement, which included housing, food, monetary assistance,  job placement, etc., while it may had provided some strains in the system they were absolve into the country.

The issue with immigration in our country has always been one of  lax enforcement of  the laws we have or a different interpretation of what those laws require us to do. currently, the most common excuse being given for the “crisis” is the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, a law meant to protect the young from human and sex traffickers by providing a different procedure of handling those UACs from those from Canada or Mexico, where they would be sent back expeditiously.

Pryor to 2012, only 1% of illegals were UACs, last year there were 26,206 UAC’s of which only 1,669 were deported according to the LA Times, this year there could be up to 90,000 according to estimates by DHS.  Something changed after 2012 that is now the driving force for the changes in the amount of UACs doing the perilous journey from mainly El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras through Mexico and into the US.

Pro-immigration proponents will say that violence and poor conditions in those countries are the reason for the influx of UACs, while others will point out that the decision of President Obama to adopt his version of the Dream Act, allowing children of illegals to stay is the driving force. This report and interview of a mother and child by local TV station seems to lend credence to the latter.

A mother and child told CHANNEL 5 NEWS that the message being disseminated in their country is, “go to America with your child, you won’t be turned away.”

The woman, Nora Griselda Bercian Diaz, from Guatemala, said she endured threats from the Zetas and extortion from corrupt Mexican police. She eventually crossed the Rio Grande with her 6-year-old Delmi Griselda Paul Bercian by her side.

The woman said she wants a U.S. education for her daughter.

“I want to study,” said the girl who hopes to one day become a doctor.

A CHANNEL 5 NEWS crew met the mother and daughter three hours after they crossed the border illegally. They were lost and searching for Border Patrol agents.

“I was planning to go to McAllen then call a friend for her to send me money on the bus,” Bercian Diaz said.

Bercian Diaz said she has no family in the United States. Her hope of staying here relies on her little girl. She said the message in her country is that America’s borders are open to all families.

News reports in Guatemala say mothers and small children are getting bus tickets, Bercian Diaz said.

“I said, ‘I need to act right now, because this will end and my girl won’t have a future,'” Bercian Diaz said.

Ms. Diaz had been deported from the US previously, now she made the trip with her daughter in the hopes that they would not be separated and allowed to stay. As Ms. Diaz points out, the feeling in Guatemala is that there would be changes in the law soon, which means that they better take advantage of the current atmosphere now.

This story on the New York Post, details a memo from the Border Patrol that would contradict the administration’s contention that violence in Central America is the reason so many young people are streaming northward.

According to the memo, which was brought up at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday, agents grilled more than 200 non-Mexican immigrants in late May, and 95 percent of them said they headed to the US because they’d heard they could get a “permiso,” or “free pass” simply by showing up at the border.

Somehow people in these 3 countries have gotten the impression (rightfully,  it seems) that if they send their children or come with their children to the US and turn yourself to the Border Patrol that you will not be deported or will be allowed to stay indefinitely. How did these people get that impression? It obviously appears that there has been collusion between our government and pro-immigration groups as well as the government of these countries and Mexico. Having heard some of the comment by government officials from those countries they are aware of the situation and are encouraging it, if not at  least condoning it.

But, it is a crisis as the Media is trying to portray it or just a ploy to get Congress to act and pass an Immigration Reform bill that seemed to have stall?  It appears to be both, if we examine the timeline we see that until late May, while it appeared that the Republican Congress would vote on an Immigration Reform bill, the influx of UACs was unnoticed. According to DHS testimony last week, the numbers of illegals detain in the southern border are on par with last year, what is different is that the percentage of those caught changed from 65% Mexicans to others to only 35% Mexicans the others making up the difference.

The border discussion belies a bigger problem when dealing with illegal immigration and that is Visa overstayers. While estimates vary wildly from 25% to 40% and may vary also by group, Pew Hispanic Research Center estimated in 2010 that 45% of the 11.2 million illegals in the country are Visa overstayers.  The Wall Street Journal on a report last year;

Nobody is sure how many people are in the U.S. on expired visas. The most commonly cited figures equate to some four million to five million people. But that is based on a 2006 study by the Pew Hispanic Center, which relied on a formula that was created using 1990 data. In 2011, there were 159 million nonimmigrant visits to the U.S., according to the Department of Homeland Security. More than three-quarters were for pleasure. But millions also involved business travelers, temporary workers and students.

This is not just an issue that affects immigration but a national security issue as well, especially in light of September 11, when all the hijackers had legal visas into the US, 5 of them were Visa overstayers. Currently foreigners are fingerprinted when they enter the country, but no system exists to track when if ever they leave and whether they overstayed their Visa.  While a group of Republicans and Democrats want to establish a system to verify exit of those that enter the country, the President wants no such system and wants to allow any foreigner in the country the ability to apply for admission. This would include those here legally but on temporary Visas as well those that have overstayed their Visa. This is one of the many sticking points on any proposed Immigration Reform legislation. Then there is another problem, even when we issue deportation orders few comply voluntarily.  Currently there are more than 850,000 people with deportation orders still in the country.

Both sides are adamant in making the current situation into a crisis, the pro-immigration camp wants to utilize the UACs to call for a wider amnesty, after all it is for the children and you would not want to break-up the families. While the others are saying this is exactly what you get when you reward lawlessness, there is a reason most governments do not make deals with terrorists, it entices them to do it again.  Both have ramped up the rhetoric with some placing the blame on us due to the War on Drugs like here, here, and here.  On the other side there are equally misinformed articles that aim to scare the populace with stories of how these group of immigrants will bankrupt their cities, destroyed their schools and crime rate will skyrocket.

Both sides are convinced that any larger influx of Hispanics will be to their benefit are the voting booth.  A common misconception that totally ignores reality and display an ignorance about what Hispanics want and how they vote if they vote at all.  Hispanics are not block voters, like for instance the AA vote. If that was the case Texas would be Democrat controlled state in every election.  People like to point out New York and California as examples of states where the Hispanic vote is key but both of those states though they have large Hispanic population, were blue states for a long time.

This urban myth, seems to be a result at least of where the exit voting polls are taken and the belief that all Hispanics support illegal immigrants.  The areas where exit polling is done are usually in large Metro Areas,  New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, etc.  Invariably most if not all of these areas are controlled by Democrats, they are also areas where large segments of the population are dependent on government. This eschews polling data by showing a preference for governmental policies and liberal views.

Yet those preferences don’t translate in other areas here are some quick facts from the BLS;

  • Hispanics are only second to Asians in the worker participation rate at 66.4 %
  • Hispanics enter the workforce earlier that any other Ethnic group
  • Hispanics as a group also work the most past the age of 65
  • Hispanics are paid the least across all job categories

Other stats

  • Hispanics are less likely to receive government assistance
  • Hispanics that live at or under the Federal poverty level, less than 50% are receiving 1 form of assistance
  • Only 36% of those receive more than one, compared that to 68% of blacks and 57% of whites

Before anyone guesses that I am pro-amnesty or open borders, let me state that I bitterly oppose both. There are good arguments for securing our borders and for managing our immigration policies in the manner that suits the country. What I am opposed is both sides using false or misleading statements to achieve their goals. If you have to resort to sentimentality to win, then you already lost your arguments. Likewise if you have to lie and instill fear to make your point you are just as bad.

I am reminded of the movie Children of Men, in that postapocalyptic world where no children were being born, this meant that those alive would be the last to survive. Refugees were thrown into cages, killed or kept in Refugee Camps with no hope. Finally a woman is pregnant with the first baby in more than 18 years, the rebels that opposed the immigration policies wanted to use the baby as a rallying cry to a full-blown rebellion, willing to kill the only woman who could start the next generation of humankind.  Talk about cutting your nose to spite your face. In many ways this is what is happening with the surge in UACs, some are hoping that the large migration of juveniles will force the government to act their way, risking the lives of those kids on a long and perilous journey to do so. Others are using the surge to do the opposite, demonizing  a large group of citizens along the way, who agree with them in the first place.

Finally, I wanted to answer Univision’s reporter Jorge Ramos, who tweeted that government should not be in the business of deporting children; to which I say,  government should not be in the business of  trafficking of children, which is exactly what is happening, and it is a lucrative business. As this story reports or This one also thanks to Clarice Feldman at American Thinker.

Race- Getting wrong again- The Case against Reparations

UPDATE!

Kevin Williamson writing for the National Review gives his take on the same subject, here’s an except:

It may very well be the case that African Americans will never, no matter what policies are enacted, catch up economically with whites. Even assuming that invidious racism were an entirely negligible factor, it is likely that economic development will tend to proceed along broad racial channels if, for example, people of various ethnicities tend to largely marry within their ethnic group, live in neighborhoods largely populated by co-ethnics, and engage in other social-sorting behavior that is racial at its root but not really what we mean by the word “racism.” If that is the case — and it seems that it is — then initial conditions will be very important for a very long period of time.

And that would be true even if there had been no slavery and no discrimination. Imagine, for example, that rather than having been brought to the colonies as slaves, the first Africans to arrive in the New World had come as penniless immigrants in 1900. If their incomes grew in the subsequent century at the same rate as those of white natives, then a century later they’d still be as far behind as they were when they arrived. Income gaps have been closed and closed quickly by some immigrant groups — notably European Jews, Vietnamese immigrants, and Indian immigrants — because their incomes across the first few generations grew much, much more quickly than the native rate. And though the hostility that often met these immigrants is not comparable to the experience of slavery and African Americans’ subsequent repression, it is worth appreciating that Jewish and Asian immigrants have not always been welcomed with universal warmth. The black experience is unique within the context of American history, but it is hardly unique within the context of the experience of other racial minorities in other societies throughout history.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/378737/case-against-reparations-kevin-d-williamson

 

The election season must be near, it is easy to tell as articles such as, the Atlantic’s  Ta-Nehisi Coates’, “The case for reparations“, get published and become the fodder for all the talking heads in the MSM. While it was not his intent he makes a good case as to why we don’t need reparations.  In his attempt to demonstrate the uniqueness of the “Black Plight” he rather shows how similar the experience is to that faced by other groups of immigrants and migrant worker who have thrived and persevered despite the obstacles they originally faced. After quoting the Bible, John Locke and another anonymous source he begins his essay thus:

“The state’s regime partnered robbery of the franchise with robbery of the purse. Many of Mississippi’s black farmers lived in debt peonage, under the sway of cotton kings who were at once their landlords, their employers, and their primary merchants. Tools and necessities were advanced against the return on the crop, which was determined by the employer. When farmers were deemed to be in debt—and they often were—the negative balance was then carried over to the next season.”

Peonage or debt servitude was very common and it was not limited  to blacks but many white farmers had similar arrangements and similar results. A real example of State sponsored Peonage would be like that which was instituted by the Spanish Crown in 1873 when it abolished slavery in Puerto Rico. Under the new law that emancipated the slaves, the slave owners were compensated by the government for their former slaves but it also decreed that the former slaves must work the land of their previous owner for a minimum of 3 years.  They would not be “free” until that time expired.  Though they would be compensated for their work, they could not leave until the peonage had been paid.  Those that did not stay on the land that was provided to them, as many did, without title to the property until their time was up would lose claim to the property and became fugitives. That is not what Mr. Coates describes, but a very common happening to this day of farmers borrowing money for expenses using the projected future crops, with the land as collateral.  If the crops failed or prices deviated many farmers found themselves losing their land to their lenders or bank.  But fallow land is not profitable so many lenders resorted to share-cropping , that would allow the farmer to remain and work the land while debts were paid and crops was the only collateral available to them at that point. In Mississippi for instance while 70+% of black farmers were sharecroppers so were 40% of white farmers.  By the 1920’s  the price of cotton was on a free fall which meant perpetual debts for both black and white farmers. Coates likes to use small anecdotes in making his case, but they leave out information,  is misleading,  incomplete or unverifiable. His anecdote on how the Ross family lost their farm due to back taxes, for instance does not have a date only that it was when Mr. Ross was a child.  He then talks about a story by the AP in 2001 detailing 406 victims throughout the South that the story determine were documented thefts of black properties.  Sad as that may have been 406 “thefts” out of the millions of farmers that existed in the South is hardly indicative of anything. Again he does not mention the story by name, or authors or provide a link. He goes on to detail how Mr. Ross was a smart kid but the better school was to far to walk and return in time to work the fields, this strikes me as a decision of convenience for him and his family. Whether the white kids had access to a school bus or not is immaterial as he was not prevented from attending this new school because of  busing, schools were segregated, but because it would be inconvenient to the family. The same thing happens with Coates’ anecdote about Mr. Ross horse. The story is meant to garner sympathy for a young child. But, does it do that.  Examining the story it is very strange that if the point was to relieve the kid of the horse that they would pay anything for it. Further, if you do a simple search about the prices of a colt,  you find that $17 is about the  price you would pay in 1933 for a 2-year-old colt.  A 6 month-old horse was worth about $8, he could buy 2 for the price of the one he lost or sold.  I can’t help but wonder if because, this was 1933 and the 4th year into the Depression that having a horse for leisure was an extravagant luxury during that time. Cotton had been falling from their high pre-Civil War highs when the South produced 3/4 of  the world’s cotton. In 1919 cotton hit its high 35 cent per bale before the bottom fell out of cotton prices. By 1933 the price was down to 5 cents per bale.  In fact the sharp decrease in prices of cotton in the 20’s led to the First Great Migration of blacks farmers to the North. Looking back at historical data, the avg. price of cotton between 1900 and 1945 was 14.6 cents,  from a high of 35 cents in 1919 to a low 5 cents in 1933 so the prices the Ross family was being paid are certainly within the range of what others were getting regardless of race. Cotton prices would not hit 50 cents a pound until the mid 1970’s, all of this information is readily available for Mr. Coates if he wanted to educate or inform the readers of plight of the farmers at the turn of the century. Living in a farm is hard work, regardless of race.  The years at the turn of the century were hard on farmers there is no need to try to insinuate that things were harder because of race.  The same hardships were faced by White sharecroppers as Black sharecroppers. Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty show, was suspended from his show on the A&E network,  was suspended  for his comments on gay relationships but in that same article he also said this:

“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field…. They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!… Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

There were calls by some to label Robertson for saying this, as it is against the prevailing story from people like Mr. Coates that Blacks left the South because of discrimination which drove them out of their farms and homes. The truth is a little more nuanced than that.  Is interesting that Mr. Coates choose to showcase Mr. Ross’ story and not someone from another southern State.  Mississippi was the first State to elect a Black Senator in 1870 and the second in 1875.  Their new Constitution in 1868, the  convention adopted universal suffrage; did away with property qualifications for suffrage or for office, a change that also benefited poor whites; provided for the state’s first public school system; forbade race distinctions in the possession and inheritance of property; and prohibited limiting civil rights in travel.   The reforms only lasted for 22 years until 1890 when a new constitution disenfranchised most blacks and poor whites but by that time fully 2/3 of Mississippi’s Delta  farmers where black. Blacks kept coming to the Delta area and it was not until first agricultural depression culminating in the early 20’s that the first Great Migration of  Blacks to the North occurred.  As falling prices of Cotton caused many Black and White farmers to sell their land in order to pay-off  debts.  Though many did remain as sharecroppers for another 20 years. Was discrimination part of the decision to leave the Delta farms and seek better fortunes in the North, probably but it was not until the economic conditions got dire that many made that decision.  The North needed labor, the South had excess labor as with Migration of workers economics was the driving factor. Mr. Coates continues with Mr. Ross’ life by detailing his efforts to buy a home in Chicago,  using  a Contract for Deed.  He tries very hard to make the practice seem nefarious, but that is far from the case. Contract for Deed or Land Contracts are still used to this day.  It provides people who have lack credit or have limited resources and opportunity to own a  property and are used quite frequently.  Are there risks involved sure for both the buyer and the seller. Depending on how the contracts are written a buyer risks losing his investments if he loses his job or some large expense like the boiler breaks down and he is unable to pay for the repairs.  Owners risk potential buyers leaving the property before the contract is finished in deplorable conditions that would require a capital expense before the property could be sold again. Either way Mr. Ross was able to purchase his home using this method despite his complaints against the way by which he bought the property. The complaint about lack  of access to equity in the house while on the Contract Sale is true, but if as Mr.Ross did, and buy out his home the equity did not disappear only his access to it while paying for the house. None of this would strike any other large group of immigrant out of the ordinary, Germans, Poles, Jews, Italians, Irish, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Dominicans, etc all faced restrictions and lack of access to financing, areas where they could not buy a house at all and were steered to certain areas at one point or another. Mr. Ross’ story should be one about perseverance and success not as case for reparations.  It seems such a shame that rather than celebrating his achievements we are told to see his story as one of deprivation and envy because his journey should have been easier in Mr. Coates’ opinion.

“Contract sellers became rich. North Lawndale became a ghetto…” “According to the most-recent statistics, North Lawndale is now on the wrong end of virtually every socioeconomic indicator. In 1930 its population was 112,000. Today it is 36,000. The halcyon talk of “interracial living” is dead. The neighborhood is 92 percent black. Its homicide rate is 45 per 100,000—triple the rate of the city as a whole. The infant-mortality rate is 14 per 1,000—more than twice the national average. Forty-three percent of the people in North Lawndale live below the poverty line—double Chicago’s overall rate. Forty-five percent of all households are on food stamps—nearly three times the rate of the city at large. Sears, Roebuck left the neighborhood in 1987, taking 1,800 jobs with it. Kids in North Lawndale need not be confused about their prospects: Cook County’s Juvenile Temporary Detention Center sits directly adjacent to the neighborhood.”

This is one of Mr. Coates’ most spurious charges, he does not explain how Black home ownership created a ghetto with all the connotations that come with that charge.  If home ownership created a ghetto in North Lawndale, then perhaps the problem is the pressure that is put on Blacks to own a home when renting is better option.  Instead of pushing for higher rates of home ownership, especially of those on the fringes we should discourage it until they a stronger foundation (long-term employment, financial security, marriage, stability, substantial down payment) things that many first-time Black buyers lack, but feel pressure to commit to buying a home nevertheless. There segregation was policy practice against Blacks, as it was other groups but does policies are not in force now and have not been for decades.  Today’s segregated communities are the result, in many cases of governmental policies.  Free or subsidize Housing that directs the poor to certain neighborhoods, welfare policies that penalize recipients if they get married, obtain a job or move to another area and the lack of accountability of those that game the system. Making matters worse, has become permissive of lifestyle choices that while at pains to say it, sociologists have now recognized that the family unit is the a main contributor to many of the ills that Mr. Coates feel will be cure by re-desegregation.  Including lower crime rates, higher wealth and incomes.  It is the reason why Latinos the group most often compared, comparatively to Blacks have surpassed them in practically every category even though back in the 60’s they trailed Blacks and Whites by wide margins. Today Latino’s are reaching parity with Whites in all categories and are poised to supplant Whites as the largest Ethnic group. The rest of Coates’ long essay does not break any new ground, he tries to correlate poverty with crime as an excuse to the Black real problems with high crime in their neighborhoods.  One statement he made I want to address.  He writes the following:

“From the White House on down, the myth holds that fatherhood is the great antidote to all that ails black people. But Billy Brooks Jr. had a father. Trayvon Martin had a father. Jordan Davis had a father. Adhering to middle-class norms has never shielded black people from plunder. Adhering to middle-class norms is what made Ethel Weatherspoon a lucrative target for rapacious speculators. Contract sellers did not target the very poor. They targeted black people who had worked hard enough to save a down payment and dreamed of the emblem of American citizenship—home ownership. It was not a tangle of pathology that put a target on Clyde Ross’s back. It was not a culture of poverty that singled out Mattie Lewis for “the thrill of the chase and the kill.” Some black people always will be twice as good.”

Yes, Trayvon Martin had a “father”  and mother as did Jordan Davis and Billy Brooks Jr. but what they lacked was a family unit. All three were sent to stay with their fathers because they had become too much to handle for their respective mothers.  Being a sperm donor is easy, being a father is much harder.  Showing up after problems manifest themselves is failing in your duties as a father and should not be celebrated. Ethel Weatherspoon, like Clyde Ross bought a house in the North Lawndale area is she also to blame for the condition of the neighborhood today? Of course not, and neither are the rapacious speculators that sold them the house.  They wanted the American Dream to own a house and they did, using the method available to them as many others of limited means did before. That is the problem with Mr. Coates’ essay, with the exception of the despicable period of slavery, the hardships and triumphs  are the same that many other ethnic groups faced and are still facing. The Black experience is only singular in their estimation, as is their feeling that because of slavery their road should to success should have been paved, rather than a curvy, rock-strewn one with detours along the way.

The road to success is not straight. There is a curb called Failure, a loop called Confusion; speed bumps called Friends; red lights called Enemies;caution lights called Family. You will have flats called jobs. But, if you have a spare called Determination; an engine called Perseverance; insurance called Faith, and a driver called Jesus, you will make it to a place called Success!!- Anon.

.

Racial profiling, prejudice and bigotry, why the Race Card is maxed out.

Bloomberg, a national publication used the following headline in a story a few days ago; “House Republicans Set to Defy Obama Are Mostly White Men,”.  Which begs the question, why they deemed it relevant to focus on the race and gender of the people in Congress opposing Obama? Is this another of those whistle the left is hearing to proclaim some sort of hidden racism.  Are they implying that those that are opposing the President are only doing so because they are white?  Is Bloomberg racially profiling the Congressmen?

Then there is this a fellow blogger from Australia ask this; Was it racial profiling?  

http://youtu.be/y70tZDW2AqY

Apparently not according to officials but a case of snitching.  The 13-year-old that got the beat down had snitched on one of the 3 for attempting to sell him drugs earlier in the day.  In hindsight someone should have noted that they might ride the bus together and  there could be problems.

A lot talk recently from the President on down about Racial profiling and Racism as a result of the George Zimmerman Not Guilty verdict in the killing of Trayvon Martin.  There have been howl of outrage, calls to replace laws to make it more possible for the prosecution to convict people, for the repeal of the Stand Your Ground laws, though they did not play a part in the case.  Some are calling to make it illegal for private citizens to racially profile as it is for government agents, cops, etc.

So what is racially profiling and it is something that needs our attention to the exclusion of other problems in the US but particularly to the black community?  It racially profiling the same as Racism or worse? Racial profiling at its worst is prejudging a race of people and assigned them a characteristic or group of characteristics that are not exclusive of the every one of that race.  It also used to describe Ethnic profiling as the same.  For example, all Asians are considered to be great at math, which may be true for some but not all Asians.  Another would be to say that all Mexicans are immigrants, or someone who sees a Spanish surname and assumes that you speak Spanish or that English is your second language, the last two being examples of Ethnic profiling.

Most forms of profiling even racial profiling are harmless, but sometimes the prejudice behind the profiling can become such that it becomes bigotry, and it affects how some people react to others, in some cases with disastrous effects.  As it was with slavery  and later the Jim Crow laws or Jews and the Holocaust. There are many other examples of where profiling a people led to great tragedy, most recently Bosnia and Rwanda come to mind.  In the US the issue is the profiling of certain young black males and minorities as dangerous.

Here’s the rub statistics show that this may be the case, certainly not for everyone but for enough to make the prejudice last and stick.  As a father of 2 young black men, this concerns me, which have made me try to ensure that my kids, understand and behave in a manner that is contrary to the stereotype.  I cannot get upset a people for behaving in a way that instinctual, while I don’t do ensure on my part that my kids are acting accordingly.  If I allow my kids to act and behave like thugs, who is to blame if they are seen as thugs.  Racial profiling is not the problem, humans are reacting to what too many young black males are doing.

In France the issue is young Muslim males, in Russia is young disaffected white males, so the issue is not racially profiling but behavior profiling, but those this rise to the level of bigotry or racism?  If you listen to civil rights leaders like Sharpton, Jackson or the NAACP they know so, but from my personal experience that is not the case.  In my estimation people are behaving to this the same way they behave all around the world in the face of young predators.

As modern humans we do not share all the same characteristics as our earlier ancestors. We don’t depend on instinct to make decisions we use observation and reasoning. Sometimes we read books about a subject or activity and depend on the observation and reasoning of others. As social creatures we share information, it is the sharing of this information, much which have been gathered by the observation and reasoning, sometimes of others that have allowed us to survive, to thrive and be the dominant species in this world. That is not to say that the observations and critical thinking have always been right, in fact many have been wrong but with time they have evolved ensuring our survival.

Each day is a struggle for survival, though it may be something that we don’t think about consciously, most  if not all our daily tasks serve the purpose of continuing our survival for another day.  Things we do in the course of a normal day such as eating, drinking, working so that we have money to eat and drink.  Exercising so that our bodies are fit, reading to calm our minds and entertain, bathing to wash away the daily grime and keep microbes in check just about everything we do daily can be tied to our quest for survival.

The night was specially scary for our ancestors as the darkness allow our predators, who were biologically more capable of functioning in the dark, some had better night vision, others had other senses that allowed to take advantage of the dark and would make us an easy prey.  It cause us to become more communal, as there was safety in numbers, we manage to control fire which not only brought us warmth in the cold but also helped to keep the predator away.  As our civilization advanced the tables were turned we not feared the night, and those predators were now our prey.  But with this advancement a new predator appeared, one that was more cunning, resourceful  and worst that any other prey that humans had come up against.

That prey was of course, other humans.  As our civilization progressed the need for communal living and help was abated.  We did not need to move only in groups to ward off predators and prevent becoming dinner.  We could live alone and apart from each other, with the knowledge that except under very rare circumstances there would be no animal predators just lurking to eat us. That worked fine for animal predators but for human ones not so much. We needed new ways to combat the new predator, our homes became impregnable castles in many places, we carry pepper spray, noise makers and guns.  We are told by the police who are tasked with suppressing these predators to travel in groups, use well-traveled routes in essence behave as our ancestors did in other to survive. As our ancestors did in that long bygone era, we have to learn who is safe, who is not, where it is safe to go, where it is not.

We need to know who is the predator and how not become a victim of one. Being able to distinguish friend from foe, and knowing which animals could provide food and which to avoid was something that is ingrained in us.  It is an ability that allowed us survived and build our civilization.  But in today’s civilization were are being asked to forget that which has served us so well, by surrendering to Political Correctness.  

There have been much talk about racial profiling, racism and Stand Your Ground laws, SYG for short, all while avoiding why this happens, and nothing really happens in a vacuum.  Many people don’t know this but the word “racism” did not become part of the English Vernacular until at least 1935.  Before then we use a word that is has a more appropriate meaning to what people mean now, when they use the word racist, bigot.  Though the word has a religious origins meaning a religious hypocrite as it is still use in Italian “bigotto”, it became to used to describe someone who is intolerant of someone because of prejudice or bias against that person or group. Racism on the other hand is the belief that one’s race is either superior or inferior to another race which leads to actions in accordance of that belief.

Let’s put that in the context of what the President Obama said in the aftermath of the Zimmerman verdict, and the human instinct that allowed us to survive all this time;

There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.

There are probably very few African-American men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me – at least before I was a senator.

There are very few African-Americans who haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off.
That happens often.

The implication of the President was that these actions were the actions of someone who was racist, but if we examine them they hardly rise to the level of bigotry, much less racism.  Department Stores owners follow people all the time for a variety of reasons, is the President saying that security follows or watches a white person that is prudent but watching a black one is racist.  Having had the experience of Managing a retail establishment, I would like to inform the President that in my experience the shoplifter at retail establishment, those that like to stuff little items in their bags are almost always white, if a black person is followed it is not because of the danger of stolen goods but for other suspicious behavior.  For instances they are tracking customers to pick their pockets.  Putting that aside in those communities were there are few blacks, it is still racism if  a store owner follows someone, it he doing it out of spite and bigotry or because he is trying to protect his business and those customers that come to his establishment?

The clicks on the car doors are they really because you are approaching and their has been a rash of carjacking in the area, by people who looked very much like you, until you became a Senator and started dressing differently,  As for the old woman clutching her purse and holding her breath is this because of racism or someone who is fearful and hoping that she does not become a victim of a predator.  Being in an elevator in a small enclosed spaced is terrifying enough but being along with a large stranger, more so.  But is this racism?  It is even bigotry?  Or it more likely, that it is a self-fulfilling prophesy, of those that see racism in the shadows, and interpret every action as such.

Nothing happens in a vacuum,  if a black shopkeeper follows some young black males is he being a bigot against his people or is he acting prudently to protect his business.  A black woman who clutches her bag under the circumstances described by the President is she also being bigoted, or perhaps someone who knows that she could become a victim at any time.  This is not to say that racism does not exist in the true meaning of the word.  But racist are all colors and not just white or white Hispanic as the PC establishment would have us believe.  It is evident all around us though few recognize for such, because we have been indoctrinated into thinking only white on black.

A few years ago,  Jeremy Lin an Asian American Harvard grad, became a sensation in New York when he became the starting point guard for the team, leading the team to a streak of victories.  What many don’t remember is the many black players and commentators that called him a fluke,  and that there were many black players that did what he did and better but were not getting the same type of publicity.  That is racism, the belief of their race superiority over the Asians ball playing skills.  It is the same with many European basketball players that come to play in the NBA, too often their role is of bench-warmer and they were given little opportunity to fail of succeed over comparable black players who were performing the same.  Sports racism is rampant in the US, though it is not recognized.

Racism exists and it will always be around, because we are all human, thinking and believing that we are superior to others in one way or another is just a way of group identity.  The issue is that most of the problems that are called racism are not, but what a reasonable person would think in a set situation.  Cops in NY, don’t stop and frisk more blacks and minorities for their jollies, they do so because it is an effective way to prevent crime and catch criminals, as it is shown by New York city being the safest large city in the country and the world.

Nothing happens in a vacuum,  people will continue to act in a way that will aid their survival, not because they are racist, or bigoted but because history has shown that being prudent and acting accordingly in the face of the threat of danger, can mean you live another day.  It is why calling every action a form of racism has exhausted the Race Card.   The problem will not be solved by ignoring the cause and people’s attitude and prejudices will not change until the cause is address and change becomes permanent.

A Nation in Fear and Cowards on Race

UPDATE!

The president gave a speech today about race and the Zimmerman case.  The Administration is which first made a local story into a National one, continues to so.  There will be a day when we all put people who perpetuate racial stereotypes in their place, even if he is the President, but until then you can read a transcript of his comments here, needless to say that while attempting to sound conciliatory all he managed is stoke emotions, and repeat all the wrong lessons. More on that later.

Full Remarks: Obama speaks on race

 

I have been married for almost 23 years to a wonderful, caring and hard-working woman.  We have 2 great young men, and I beautiful little princess the jewel in my eye.  We have had good times, bad times, we have argued and we have loved each other, but most of all we have been partners in everything.  She also happens to be Black.

When we met on a cool April day in New York, I was struck by her beauty and something that was hard for me to define at the time but I came to realize was a dignity and proud bearing that I found extremely enduring and attractive.  I we got to know each other I found out that underneath that proud bearing was a tortured soul, pulled on 2 sides by what she thought her community expected of her and what her family taught her.  It is a struggle that continues to this day.

The Zimmerman case brought that struggle to the forefront again, as she is caught between 2 worlds again. Her initial reaction was to condemn George Zimmerman, because he was the racist boogeyman that many in her community believes haunts them.  It was like a knee jerk reaction, something instinctual that could not be explained unless you were Black, only then would you understand.  To her as a mother of 2 black young man, this unnatural fear that was evoked by the Trayvon Martin, TM for here on,  killing was founded on her perception of a reality that really does not exist, but at the time she would not admit to that, she couldn’t.  Many still can’t.

I first became aware of the case by complete accident, and only because my sister lives in Sanford and one of  my nephews is the same age as TM. My sister and I grew up apart, and unfortunately are not as close as we should be,  but upon hearing a young black male teenager was shot in Sanford, I was immediately concerned.  As I searched for more information I found out that the shooting was next door to where she lived, I was alarmed as was my wife, who unlike me, talks to my sister on a regular basis.  Unable to reach her, I searched on the internet for any information on the case, eventually I found the Conservative Treehouse,  http://theconservativetreehouse.com/  who were following the case in-depth.

I found out later that the reason I was unable to contact my sister was that she had moved the week prior to the shooting, and had changed her phone number, but by then I knew it was not my nephews that were involved, at the same time I had developed an interest in the case, because what the MSM was saying about the case was in deep conflict with what I was reading on the CTH and another site that followed the case closely Mike McDaniel’s site, https://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/.  The more I read about the case the more disturbed I became as I recognized something that I had witnessed several times in life living in New York, a racial railroading of a person or group.

As I do with everything that I find interesting I discussed it with my family, I thought that this would be a perfect cautionary tale for my sons.  I was not prepared for the backlash that my sons or my wife gave me.  To their thinking it was all racial, my wife all she could see  in her mind was a picture of a cute young TM in a Hollister shirt, at the time no other more recent pictures had been released, and though I tried to no avail point out the problems with the Narrative that was being sold, to the nation.   I was shouted down, and was called insensitive by my family, they could not understand nor could I explain fully why this case was not as it was being portrayed by the Media.

My wife and I while we do not agree on everything, at least we could see each other’s point even on the most contentious of issues.  This time that was not the case, and it made me more determined than ever to find out everything  could about the case and the people involved.  What I found out, only confirmed my suspicions and now we know that jury not knowing everything that was to know about the case agreed and exonerated George Zimmerman of the politically motivated charges of Murder in the 2nd Degree and Manslaughter.

After the verdict, the reaction by the Black community has been quick, harsh and in my opinion completely unrealistic and not reflective of the case or the evidence.  Too many Black people see this as an insult and as corroboration of deep held beliefs, that White controlled society has abused them again.  I do not identify as Black, White or Hispanic, I always say that I am an un-hyphenated American and that is the way I treat my kids, who by virtue of having a Black mother and features are could be considered Black.

I need to backtrack here, and provide a little background on my better half.  She grew up in a middle class neighborhood bordering an Army base.  As a child most of her friends were not black, and she is still in contact with most of them.  She grew up in with a nice pool in the backyard, a lake to go swimming or fishing a walking distance away, she grew up in suburbia.  Most of her cousins on the other hand did not, they grew in the harsh cities in Jersey City and New York or the black ghettos  in the South.  As a consequence, she through out her life has been called a white girl wannabe by members of her race.  Blackness is not only skin color but an attitude and a way of expression.  My wife never fit that mold, in that regard she and I are very similar.

I on the other hand grew up in the ghetto  in Harlem, until her death my great-grandmother was my caretaker, and while I did spend about 5 years in Puerto Rico as a kid, the rest of the time I was in New York.  I was very poor growing up, though I came from a family that was well off in Puerto Rico.  I remember visiting my aunts and uncles in Puerto Rico and coming back to our humble home with hundreds of dollars worth of clothes and cash, I guess some in the family felt guilty because my abuela due circumstances was cut off from them, and this was a way of atonement for them.  Abuela was very proud and she would not ever go with me on those trips to see the rest of my family, I did not realize it then but my enthusiasm and joy that I showed when I came back with my booty must have been extremely hard on her pride, as she would wish that she was the one providing me with those material things.  The two most important things that she taught me were to be a hard worker, though over 70 at the time she would work hard to provide for us.  She raised pigs so that during Christmas she could slaughter one and sell the meat which she used to get me Christmas gifts, she had sheep for milk and chickens for eggs,  she would cook for others in the neighborhood and they would eat with us and bring things for her to cook and we all shared, though very poor we were never hungry.  The other thing she taught me was to never judge a person based on color, creed or appearance but on their actions. Those two lessons have served me well in life, and when I met my wife though we were of different races and backgrounds, we could both overlook those differences and found a lasting connection.

This case was causing a minor rift between us, and while she eventually saw the truth about the case it served for us to have an honest conversation on race in America and for me to conclude we are a nation in fear and we are cowards when the subject is race, because any honest conversation about race will mean exposing some ugly truths about us all.

No honest conversation on race can be had until we accept the past, and at the same time accept the present.  Our nation is not the same nation of the early part of the 20th century, trying to say otherwise is dishonest, and it helps to end the conversation before it even starts.  So any honest conversation about race will mean that we need to stop fearing the truth, not just of the past but accepting some things about us today, it would also mean we need to stop trying to blame each other, and most of all we need to remove politics from the discussion.

White people will have to accept that the legacy from slavery,  Jim Crow,  separate and unequal, etc will not go away anytime soon if ever.  Whether they agreed or not they were and for the most part are still the Establishment as such you will have to accept that you will be blamed, not necessarily your are responsible but you will be blamed, accept it.  Trying to fight it only prolongs the time for solutions.  Scolding Blacks as children or coddling them will not help, it just reinforces their feelings of being bullied and a victim.  It does not mean we ignore problems but we that we work together towards solutions.  Angry or consolidating rhetoric is just more carbon dioxide in air.  We have to learn to live not in fear of the black men, and not be cowards when speaking about race.

Blacks need to accept that we are not living under same conditions as 50 years ago.  It does not mean we forget, but the opposite we remember and most importantly realize how far we have come, and where we need to go. Blaming all their ills on the past just assures that we don’t move forward.  It is not a white man who forces kids to do drugs, steal or skip school.  Blacks like to talk about how bad education is in their community but how many kids are labeled as trying to be white because they study hard?  When they talk with proper english and diction how many are bullied by others?  Why is it that black immigrants do better than those native-born? Why are we teaching our kids to be hard, take no shit from anyone ? Rather that being conciliatory and solve problems with discussions instead of violence?  Sports are NOT, not the only gateway out the ghetto, in fact it is rare occurrence.  Education and hard work has uplifted more than all sports combined.  The violence in our neighborhoods is rampant and we need to stop it, it is not White on Black genocide but Black on Black and anyone that says otherwise is lying to you and does not care for the community. We must let go of the fear of the establishment and not be a coward and speak out when we are being misled with BS.

As an American, a White hispanic, father of two young Black man, I made sure that they are respectful, mindful of the laws and most of all good people who don’t judge others based on their actions not their color or ethnicities.  Let us get together and get rid of those charlatans that say anything to keep us divided,  at the end of the day we are just one race that is the human race until we all remember that we are doomed to petty fights with no end in sight.  That does not help anyone, except those that perpetuate those myths aimed at keeping us divided and them in power.

The Zimmerman case demonstrated again how easily it is to divide a country, not with truth but with willful lies and a little emotion.  The tragedy that happened in Sanford will continue to happen in other parts of the country unless we accept responsibility for our actions, and start thinking with our heads instead of allowing us to be manipulated by emotion, that clouds our reason.   Until face our fears of each other and stop being cowards and speak the truth to each other race relations will always be strained, no long-lasting relationship can last without honest dialog between each other, my wife and I can attest to this, the honest truth can hurt but it is needed for healing.