Critique of Black Culture

[mrnoodle]

Originally Posted by Beestie

[In reponse to dar's post]

Well, if we want to turn the focus back to the "individual" then we should probably cease using the term "culture." Unless we are saying that the term "[fill-in-the-blank] culture" has no meaning since its a generalization and that generalizations do not apply.

The notion of a society where everyone is "individual" is a myth. Even if we were to have some sort of tower of Babylon moment where we were scattered to the corners of the earth, within a year we would have grouped ourselves up again based on skin color, religious affiliation, like/dislike of Britney Spears...

And anyway, most generalizations have at least a kernel of truth to them. They're not universally true, but they're true somewhere. White people eat an inordinate amount of mayonnaise. Black people are more likely to be good gospel singers. So?

The fact remains that people are still responsible for their actions. Opportunity is something that has to be sought out - you can't just sit around on the doorstep waiting for someone to hand it to you. And that's what Sharpton, et al, are preaching. Their constituency is starting to see the hypocrisy, and it won't be long before another MLK steps up to put the asshats in their place.

[/blahblahblah]

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

Their constituency is starting to see the hypocrisy, and it won't be long before another MLK steps up to put the asshats in their place.

Don't hold your breath, victimhood and denial of responsibility is a lucrative nostrum.

Read up on the "diffusion of responsibility" studies in psychology.

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

Opportunity is something that has to be sought out - you can't just sit around on the doorstep waiting for someone to hand it to you.

Not necessarily. Sometimes, they just happen to fall in your lap. On the flip side, you could search the ends of the world, but you just might not find/get an opportunity.

And that's what Sharpton, et al, are preaching. Their constituency is starting to see the hypocrisy, and it won't be long before another MLK steps up to put the asshats in their place.

Sharpton and his ilk keep issues that are important to many blacks in the forefront...just when you think they've gone away, here they come again! I don't think they're looking for a handout (yes, free health insurance is a handout, but we'll talk about that at another time)...they just want to sit at the table of brotherhood. And from their perspective, they're still at the kiddie table...or in small chairs that leave them looking up at the table.

Having said that, Sharpton and Jackson have big-time credibility issues...issues that they've brought on themselves. I think they've done much good for blacks, but it's time for them to let someone else take charge...a Kweisi Mfume, a Harold Ford or a Jesse Jackson, Jr. perhaps.

[mrnoodle]

Originally Posted by sycamore

Not necessarily. Sometimes, they just happen to fall in your lap. On the flip side, you could search the ends of the world, but you just might not find/get an opportunity.

You're right, but most times, if someone gets an opportunity to better themselves, they did a bit of legwork themselves. Pure luck isn't all that common - just go to Vegas sometime.

Originally Posted by sycamore

Sharpton and his ilk keep issues that are important to many blacks in the forefront...just when you think they've gone away, here they come again! I don't think they're looking for a handout...they just want to sit at the table of brotherhood. And from their perspective, they're still at the kiddie table...or in small chairs that leave them looking up at the table.

They're perpetuating emnity between races by constantly pointing out perceived slights, insults, etc. But they're not offering feasible solutions. One of the biggest jokes of modern society is this business of "raising awareness" as a solution to a problem. Pinning ribbons on lapels, booking a celebrity for a $1,000/plate dinner, bitching on cable news shows, and marching with signs raises awareness, but it's never ever ever been shown to do a damn bit of good FIXING anything. Ditto for governmental programs - they're poorly administrated, corrupt, and serve only to "show people that we're doing something". Instead, people need to be good to one another on an individual level. That can't happen when supposed "leaders" are constantly throwing lit matches into a brushpile.

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

They're perpetuating emnity between races by constantly pointing out perceived slights, insults, etc. But they're not offering feasible solutions.

I thought Sharpton had some really good plans during his presidential campaign...and he's nowhere near the firestarter he was 15 years ago.

Are folks like him too sensitive? Maybe, but that's a subjective thing...who's to say he's not in the right?

One of the biggest jokes of modern society is this business of "raising awareness" as a solution to a problem. Pinning ribbons on lapels, booking a celebrity for a $1,000/plate dinner, bitching on cable news shows, and marching with signs raises awareness, but it's never ever ever been shown to do a damn bit of good FIXING anything.

I wouldn't say that. The 1963 Birmingham incident started as one of "raising awareness," and wound up being the catalyst that led to the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act.

Ditto for governmental programs - they're poorly administrated, corrupt, and serve only to "show people that we're doing something". Instead, people need to be good to one another on an individual level. That can't happen when supposed "leaders" are constantly throwing lit matches into a brushpile.

I agree that we should treat each other well on an individual level...and I think we're getting there. And I agree that some--if not most--government programs are poorly administered. But they greatly help people who truly need them. Now, we could wax ad infinitum about how these programs may or may not have conditioned people into expecting handouts, but...

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by sycamore

I thought Sharpton had some really good plans during his presidential campaign...and he's nowhere near the firestarter he was 15 years ago.

That reminds me, what is he trying to do to help the Puerto Ricans after his last visit? Last I heard, they had an expected $300,000,000 yearly shortfall thanks to him.

[ladysycamore]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

They're perpetuating emnity between races by constantly pointing out perceived slights, insults, etc. But they're not offering feasible solutions. One of the biggest jokes of modern society is this business of "raising awareness" as a solution to a problem. Pinning ribbons on lapels, booking a celebrity for a $1,000/plate dinner, bitching on cable news shows, and marching with signs raises awareness, but it's never ever ever been shown to do a damn bit of good FIXING anything. Ditto for governmental programs - they're poorly administrated, corrupt, and serve only to "show people that we're doing something". Instead, people need to be good to one another on an individual level. That can't happen when supposed "leaders" are constantly throwing lit matches into a brushpile.

Well, as far as I'm concerned, NO ONE has *the* answer anyway. So, I personally listen to every suggestion, and pick the one that I have some common ground with.

[elSicomoro]

Oh yeah...Vieques was all his doing. Anyway...

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by sycamore

Oh yeah...Vieques was all his doing. Anyway...

I'm willing to bet that if he hadn't stuck his nose in where it didn't belong that there would still be a base there. Lobby groups can try to extort money from all of the private sector companies that they want, but as has been shown all the military has to do is utter a hardy "Fuck you Silver, away!" and problem solved.

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

I'm willing to bet that if he hadn't stuck his nose in where it didn't belong that there would still be a base there.

Possibly, but Sharpton wasn't the only high-profile person protesting, and there had already been problems with Vieques two years prior to him getting involved.

[Undertoad]

I can think of only two groups in which I sometimes feel pride.

- My generation: I feel a kinship with people my age more than with any other group. The distinct experiences that we share, even from thousands of miles apart, are amazing. I really hope that my generation's time in power will undo some of the bullshit approaches of the past. Although from human nature I know that we also bring new problems to the table as well.

(In April of 2003 it was thought that my generation had finally faced a challenge and faced it head-on. We were 2-0 and kicking ass. By one year later with Abu Ghraib, we had really completely blown it for the free world and the past victories were forgotten. This is my generation's calling: we will simultaneously fucking clean up the baby boomer's mess AND take the blame for it. Knowing the truth, I feel pride for us.)

- Americans: the connection is weaker, but from time to time it comes through and gives me that moment of pride.

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

This is my generation's calling: we will simultaneously fucking clean up the baby boomer's mess AND take the blame for it. Knowing the truth, I feel pride for us.)

You realize that you are a baby boomer (1946-64), right?

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by sycamore

You realize that you are a baby boomer (1946-64), right?

No, I go by Strauss & Howe's 13th Generation 1961-1981.

survived a hurried childhood of divorce, latchkeys, open classrooms and devil-child movies. They came of age curtailing the earlier rise in youth crime and fall in test scores — yet heard themselves denounced as so wild and stupid as to put The Nation At Risk. As young adults, maneuvering thru a sexual battlescape of AIDS and blighted courtship rituals, they date and marry cautiously. In jobs, they embrace risk and prefer free agency over loyal corporatism. From grunge to hip-hop, their culture reveals a hardened edge. Politically, they lean toward pragmatism and non-affiliation and would rather volunteer than vote. Widely criticized as "slackers," the non-techies among them have faced a Reality Bites economy of declining young-adult living standards.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by sycamore

You realize that you are a baby boomer (1946-64), right?

We didn't used to be.

The cutoff was 1959/60 ... I was very proud to be part of the unnamed generation that was sandwiched in between the boomers and Generation X.

[elSicomoro]

I think I'll keep the '46-'64 years for the Boomers along with Gen X ('65-'75 or '79 or '81...no one seems to agree on this one like they do on the Boomers). Gen X was a great punk band...The 13th Generation sounds like some crappy '70s lite rock band.