I don’t get your point. They all exemplified personal achievement. Whether one started off with no morals and ended up with some as opposed to a person that always had them, personal achievement is personal achievement. And I recognize both.
America's Most Powerful Black Families
- Thread starter invalid
- Start date
I don’t get your point. They all exemplified personal achievement. Whether one started off with no morals and ended up with some as opposed to a person that always had them, personal achievement is personal achievement. And I recognize both.
Well the way that our world works, history is the decider of things.
Rachel Dolezal has not been accepted by the wider African American Community so that’s the difference and Cleopatra is not African American so I can care less.
These people though are mentioned in black history books written by black people. Are taught about by black people at Black schools. So there is an insinuation there that the wider black community has accepted them as one of their own.
You new blacks on the other hand want to revisit definitions, and identities, and lifestyles and explore it in ways that are a bit more granular. And I respect that. I do. Just be thorough and even handed.
That family's rise happened in an era where your skin tone was often the only deciding factor on what kinds of opportunities would be made available. That's one of the talented tenth families that Dubose was talking about. Those are the "leaders" of our race, as much as they're permitted to be.
So that's a thing that goes back generations with them. Kinda like at Southern U, who were known for preferring the redbones for their cheering squads and certain other positions that represented the school to the public, and some say it's still kinda like that now.
Wear My Dawg's Hat
Superstar
We say that these are "powerful "Black families," but for many that was not how they described themselves.
These were "fine Negroes" as my relatives used to call them. Or they were simply "colored."
Up until the late 1960s, if you called some of these folks "black," it would be almost the equivalent
of calling them "crispy" today. It was a slur.
"Black" was not always synonymous with "colored" and "Negro."
And folks from the pre-1960s era would let you know it for sure.
These were "fine Negroes" as my relatives used to call them. Or they were simply "colored."
Up until the late 1960s, if you called some of these folks "black," it would be almost the equivalent
of calling them "crispy" today. It was a slur.
"Black" was not always synonymous with "colored" and "Negro."
And folks from the pre-1960s era would let you know it for sure.
We say that these are "powerful "Black families," but for many that was not how they described themselves.
These were "fine Negroes" as my relatives used to call them. Or they were simply "colored."
Up until the late 1960s, if you called some of these folks "black," it would be almost the equivalent
of calling them "crispy" today. It was a slur.
"Black" was not always synonymous with "colored" and "Negro."
And folks from the pre-1960s era would let you know it for sure.
United “Negro” College Fund
National Association of the Advancement of “Colored” People.
The terms used to describe people of African descent in the US had evolved, from African, Negro, Colored, Afro American, Black, African American, and Black American.
Many of them refer to themselves using any of these terms interchangeably but I’m sure they use what popular during their generations.
My own people refer themselves as Colored.
And you’re right, there was a different mindset pre-civil rights. But once that came around and the black power movement, most of these folks evolved, as did most blacks, and reached a higher level of consciousness about their blackness.
this individuals would be considered black if they used their influence to change the dynamic and lifestyle of African people. if black folks still have to go thru and deal with the same challenges as my ancestors, then they are not powerful. powerful to the collective community would be no longer having to worry about money in buying something to eat, keeping up with a mortgage, not being killed by some deranged enemy. if they can't stop this issue, then they are just Negros with titles
My goodness, can y’all for once not be myopic idiots and stick to the thread topic.OP made it more than clear you can post up any black family from any type of venture as an example. So instead of spending post after post shytting on his examples (which it’s mainly the first y’all have issues with), just contribute.
Damn, this could be a helpful thread for those who want to share this type of info with (their) kids and/or who want to see black American success stories.
And it could be a good history lesson. It was because of these kinda old money families that we had the Black Wall Sts and all the other prosperous towns we had, and because of them being forced to live among us is why we were always able to rebuild when our communities were destroyed.
That's been our history for thousands of years - moving in the face of a greater threat and rebuilding elsewhere - but the crakkka separated a certain segment of our people from the masses of us so we've really been without what for every people serves as their natural internal leadership. Real positions of power that you earn strictly by energy and merit and accomplishment, not by any silly election.
And so naturally we've missed the comprehensive training,
particular to our race, in all areas of education, business, law, medicine technology, etc., that would've come from that class of people.
Thats the real tragedy: alotta sharp Black minds who would've been identified by our talented tenth and trained and groomed to eventually take over as the caretakers of our race have gone undiscovered or have been discovered by crakkkas and used to crakkka benefit.
Mike Conley from the grizzlies comes from one of these families.
Wear My Dawg's Hat
Superstar
The irony is that the "Cafe Au Lait" folks were the ones fighting the hardest for integration.
Well, integration basically wiped away a good portion of the black elite world of the past.
Meghan Markle would have looks-wise, fit into this world 60 years ago. Yet, she has a white father, was
educated and socialized primarily amongst whites, and is about to marry into British royalty. Her reality is far away from the Inkwell and Sag Harbor.
And now, most of the super high-net worth black folks of today do not come from the old
black elite: Oprah, Dr. Dre, Bob Johnson, Michael Jordan.
Congrats on a good thread. These are the conversations that can make this place a special destination.
Indiglow Meta (R$G)
Ultra.
placage was a bit more complicated than that...That’s highly disrespectful to the actual suffering and humiliation of the black women (and to a lesser extent some black men) who were fetishized and raped at the beginning of these lineages. Benefitting from white zaddy during the days of slavery, sharecropping, and Jim Crow breh, really
rep
70 to 80 percent
History is not static and definitions do change over time. So it is not incorrect to look back at history and see it through a new lens. Most of these new families were consisting of mulatto elites who benefitted from their white patriarchal line, most likely negotiated by black female slaves to accelerate the chance of their offsprings to get freedom. This has translated into these offsprings being able to build wealth and acquire education through that boost. It cannot be denied nor skipped over.
Yes we can acknowledge perservance, and the determination to establish these families which span centuries but the above cannot be ignored.
Are they a part of AA history, of course.
But do they represent the plight of the average Black American, no. I think because socioeconomic class is so intertwine with race that the biggest hurdle for blacks everywhere will be divorce it.
And that's where we were headed. I recently listened to a portion of a lecture where the lecturer was talking about how our communities as a whole were basically thriving while whites were still in the rich/poor dynamic. We're more of a socialistic people, so we didn't have that extreme have/have not contrast like whites, who are more feudalistic and greedy in nature.
If we were living in an independent state politically then those families would be using their resources to better the situation of the masses of our people because they wouldn't have been artificially separated from us. They'd have a direct interest in the masses because of the lack of a separation.
We also wouldn't be dependent so much on a few prominent "families," as we'd have long perfected the process of identifying and then training groups of leaders who from youth have been groomed for their positions of responsibility, and not elected to them like some kinda popularity contest.
But we're under European control and they know they can't let that happen so they separated us through paper bag tests, integration, and all kinds of other wickedness.
