[Enter Topic] Is Like Slavery...:snoop:

[DEAD7]

Now im gonna save us some back and forth and say the start of the breakdown in the 60's coincides with the birth of welfare* as a matter of pure coincidence. The two are in no way linked....


Not at all.

its slavery and other govt. regulation/policies(such as jim crow) that caused this...

 

[ghostwriterx]

Now im gonna save us some back and forth and say the start of the breakdown in the 60's coincides with the birth of welfare* as a matter of pure coincidence. The two are in no way linked....

Not at all.

its slavery and other govt. regulation/policies(such as jim crow) that caused this...

Black poverty rates also declined during the same period, but somehow I don't think you would draw the same causal link.

 

[DEAD7]

Black poverty rates also declined during the same period, but somehow I don't think you would draw the same causal link.

No because its a "black' drop.
The breakdown of the family effected everyone. To say it was do to slavery, would be inconsistent with the evidence as white people suffered the breakdown as well, and were not slaves.

Again, i dont want to make this an ideological thing. I want to just look at the evidence and reach a truthful conclusions... and i'm completely prepared to be wrong.



I would however draw a not-so-casual link between how income statistics are obtained/measured(typically by household) and the decreased size of the black household during this time.
in fact I would be floored if black income didnt plummet with the disappearance of fathers.

 

[ghostwriterx]

No because its a "black' drop.

white poverty rates dropped too

The breakdown of the family effected everyone. To say it was do to slavery, would be inconsistent with the evidence as white people suffered the breakdown as well, and were not slaves.

define "breakdown of the family". Nuclear definition is pretty antiquated and doesn't include unmarried couples who live together or gay couples its also tends to lump fathers who support their children who don't live in the same household with deadbeats.

Again, i dont want to make this an ideological thing. I want to just look at the evidence and reach a truthful conclusions... and i'm completely prepared to be wrong.



I would however draw a not-so-casual link between how income statistics are obtained/measured(typically by household) and the decreased size of the black household during this time.
in fact I would be floored if black income didnt plummet with the disappearance of fathers.

I think you're taking a really broad approach and trying to link them to one specific policy (welfare) to confirm your ideology. While I think its possible there's some truth to your theory. At best its one of many factors.

 

[DEAD7]

1-white poverty rates dropped too


2-define "breakdown of the family". Nuclear definition is pretty antiquated and doesn't include unmarried couples who live together or gay couples its also tends to lump fathers who support their children who don't live in the same household with deadbeats.



3-I think you're taking a really broad approach and trying to link them to one specific policy (welfare) to confirm your ideology. While I think its possible there's some truth to your theory. At best its one of many factors.

1- Absolutely, i'm just saying you cant blame slavery, or any factor unique to one demographic for the decline of every demographic. its obviously(or not so obvious to some) that something much larger and broader came into play.

2-statistical analysis will never be perfect. There will always be conditions that the stats dont catch/factor in. I'll always concede that.

3- "At best its one of many factors." While I agree completely, I think there was one factor(that will remain nameless) that was central to the decline.

and I do take a broad approach to this and almost every issue. I feel like the scope of the problem will narrow on its own as you get closer to the truth.

 

[88m3]

Which one of these comparisons were accurate?

 

[88m3]

Black poverty rates also declined during the same period, but somehow I don't think you would draw the same causal link.

I would imagine black poverty rates declined after the end of slavery as well.

 

[Blackking]

just, lol.

 

[Blackking]

Stating it was a domino effect isnt the same as proving it... but since i offered no evidence myself we will go with it(at face value).

The family breakdown occurred(and is still occurring) across the board.
If what you suggest is true, we would then need to explain why whites are suffering the same breakdown(albeit at a slower rate) as blacks... and so on for every race in America.
If i'm correct, the breakdown of the nuclear family(for everyone) remains consistent with my theory.

We have to decide whether we are going to accept the evidence or try to spin it to fit our narrative.

I for one am not surprised that instituting a govt program that replaces the father has resulted in fewer actual fathers...

So basically I gotta write some long shyt cuz you wanna act clueless af?

Sure there were mostly two parent homes after slavery but FACT: Multi-Generational poverty destroys families and communities. The 'babby mamma' issue is a low income issue that disproportionally affected black families and causes idiots to say.

Ignorance is what lead people in the 60s to believe that if you remove segregation barriers and other gov sanctioned race issues - that black americans would spring up from poverty like cuban, irish, and jews automatically and become as successful as asian immigrants.... The early 60's were like a fake energy shot. Energy then sleepness. Black men did better in 54 than 64'. Less black women and children were provided for in the 60's due to the economy and invisible racism - so while black men were getting jobs, more black women were still getting jobs and also getting on welfare. America had less poverty than most of the world at the time, ironically due to it's boost from slave labor and exploitation... So most whites and immigrants took advantage of that. Blacks were systematically trapped out of all that shyt until the 70's and since then it's a few not the masses that were in mental and situational 'places' to take advantage of certain opportunities. But of course For every one black person that 'makes' it that means there's 120,000 that should have made it but they were just against success and knowingly avoided opportunity. smh.

Ultimately certain programs did harm the black family... but your putting the egg before the chicken. Certain issues weren't talked about that doesn't mean they didn't exist. focus on teen pregnancy - but not on the issues that lead to that. Focus on crime, but not focus on the flaws of our war on poverty and economic system. Focus on joblessness, graduation rates, and homelessness, but not on resources, opportunity, and the mentality of those living in poverty. Only idiots believe 1 nikka making it out the hood equals they all will/should make it out.

Teen pregnancy didn't go up.... that was the focus of conservatives. Liberals responded with assisant programs that hurt us because of the focus on the single teen or young mom- even though black teens were actually having the same or less babies after the 50's. The issue was out of marriage babies went up and new programs made it so that girls didn't have to adopt, force marry, or abort. Also it wasn't that more black chicks wanted more babies in teen years - it was that poor girls were getting preg more often while not being married - and poverty auto lead to community breakdown so the 'community' was used to seeing single parents in the ghettos. It wasn't exclusively a black issue, it was a poor issue that affected blacks more because of self hate and lack of identity, no cultural connections like immigrants, and racial stigma attached that led to even less opportunity for their kids compared to other poor children.

 

[DEAD7]

So basically I gotta write some long shyt cuz you wanna act clueless af?

Sure there were mostly two parent homes after slavery but FACT: Multi-Generational poverty destroys families and communities. The 'babby mamma' issue is a low income issue that disproportionally affected black families and causes idiots to say.

Ignorance is what lead people in the 60s to believe that if you remove segregation barriers and other gov sanctioned race issues - that black americans would spring up from poverty like cuban, irish, and jews automatically and become as successful as asian immigrants.... The early 60's were like a fake energy shot. Energy then sleepness. Black men did better in 54 than 64'. Less black women and children were provided for in the 60's due to the economy and invisible racism - so while black men were getting jobs, more black women were still getting jobs and also getting on welfare. America had less poverty than most of the world at the time, ironically due to it's boost from slave labor and exploitation... So most whites and immigrants took advantage of that. Blacks were systematically trapped out of all that shyt until the 70's and since then it's a few not the masses that were in mental and situational 'places' to take advantage of certain opportunities. But of course For every one black person that 'makes' it that means there's 120,000 that should have made it but they were just against success and knowingly avoided opportunity. smh.

Ultimately certain programs did harm the black family... but your putting the egg before the chicken. Certain issues weren't talked about that doesn't mean they didn't exist. focus on teen pregnancy - but not on the issues that lead to that. Focus on crime, but not focus on the flaws of our war on poverty and economic system. Focus on joblessness, graduation rates, and homelessness, but not on resources, opportunity, and the mentality of those living in poverty. Only idiots believe 1 nikka making it out the hood equals they all will/should make it out.

Teen pregnancy didn't go up.... that was the focus of conservatives. Liberals responded with assisant programs that hurt us because of the focus on the single teen or young mom- even though black teens were actually having the same or less babies after the 50's. The issue was out of marriage babies went up and new programs made it so that girls didn't have to adopt, force marry, or abort. Also it wasn't that more black chicks wanted more babies in teen years - it was that poor girls were getting preg more often while not being married - and poverty auto lead to community breakdown so the 'community' was used to seeing single parents in the ghettos.

While I don't completely agree. The overarching theme of what you said is govt. intervention fukked us, and that's something I agree with and know to be true.
How the govt. has convinced niqqas these days that it is working for them or in their best interest is still beyond me.

"It wasn't exclusively a black issue, it was a poor issue that affected blacks more because of self hate and lack of identity, no cultural connections like immigrants, and racial stigma attached that led to even less opportunity for their kids compared to other poor children"

 

[bigDeeOT]

Stop

And that, is how I know you have nothing to say. My arguments cannot be deconstructed.

maybe you're valid about some of your points. However, is there really a good reason to invoke slavery when speaking on all these issues ? Why is that needed, especially when speaking to black crowds?

Because he's making an analogy. I don't think someone should refrain from making analogies because some people are so easily offended.

That's condescending and see-through as fukk.

What is condescending?

NTM - lol, I guess I was just being nice saying ur points might be valid. You're defending shyt for the sake of randomly dissing african american reading comprehension and to seem like you know what your talking about
.

How exactly is it a RANDOM diss for me to say someone lacks reading comprehension, when someone creates a thread full of links to articles that they fail to comprehend? There's nothing random about it. You make a thread running your mouth, I'm gonna call you out on it.

Defending E.W. Jackson, SMH. He says that some groups are poison and Obama has Muslim swag?!? - whatever that means.
NTM his ideas and points only tell half the story --- and like you, that clearly shows a person who doesn't know what he's talking about.

It's not that his ideas only tells half the story, it just doesn't fit the narrative that you want to hear. Plain and simple.

He says gov assistance programs are what caused single parent homes and other issues in the black community - but not slavery, the mentality that comes from oppression, or jim crow and fbi infiltration.

The out of wed lock pregnancy rate was at 20% before the creation of the welfare state, and this was in the midst of full blown jim crow and kkk lynchings. Now its at 70%. End of story.

"Slavery did not destroy the black family" You and him don't see how compound effects from history affected black people. This fakkit must have forgot that children , husbands and wifes were broken up and sold at will during slavery which started the break down and split of American black families.

Brother, again, enough with the compound effects of slavery. If slavery broke apart the family, then in the 1940s and 1950s you would see a 70% out-of-wed-lock pregnancy rate.. It was 20%.

 

[bigDeeOT]

Sure there were mostly two parent homes after slavery but FACT: Multi-Generational poverty destroys families and communities. The 'babby mamma' issue is a low income issue that disproportionally affected black families

From 1900 to 1960, the out of wedlock pregnancy rate never rose above 20 percent. And yet those blacks were living in poverty then, just as blacks are living in poverty now. But between the years of 1960-2013, the out of wedlock pregnancy rate rose from 20% to 70%. So why do we see the pregnancy rate remain stagnate in the first half of the century but more than TRIPLE in the latter half of the century?

 

[tru_m.a.c]

“It’s modern-day slavery, you know?” Peterson said. “People kind of laugh at that, but there are people working at regular jobs who get treated the same way, too. With all the money . . . the owners are trying to get a different percentage, and bring in more money.”

Adrian Peterson compares NFL labor to slavery

 

[Blackking]

From 1900 to 1960, the out of wedlock pregnancy rate never rose above 20 percent. And yet those blacks were living in poverty then, just as blacks are living in poverty now. But between the years of 1960-2013, the out of wedlock pregnancy rate rose from 20% to 70%. So why do we see the pregnancy rate remain stagnate in the first half of the century but more than TRIPLE in the latter half of the century?

Somehow it's only because of welfare and medicaid, and not also because of America's changing ideas on marriage and the push for matriarchal households in the black community. Not because the black man was downgraded since slavery, jim crow etc.... and not because of The fact that black men were less able to provide for families (in comparison to others) during the 50/60's. Just like the unemployment rate for black young men more than double after the 60's had no affect at all...

The break down started to happen before the 50's..... only ignorant people believe that just because some stats spiral up after the 60's that those issues originated in the 60's programs... those programs only compounded the issue.

From the Department of Labor. Gov... after extensive research on the subject....

Robert O. Blood, Jr. and Donald M. Wolfe, in a study of Detroit families, note that "Negro husbands have unusually low power,"28 and while this is characteristic of all low income families, the pattern pervades the Negro social structure: "the cumulative result of discrimination in jobs..., the segregated housing, and the poor schooling of Negro men."29 In 44 percent of the Negro families studied, the wife was dominant, as against 20 percent of white wives. "Whereas the majority of white families are equalitarian, the largest percentage of Negro families are dominated by the wife."30

The matriarchal pattern of so many Negro families reinforces itself over the generations. This process begins with education. Although the gap appears to be closing at the moment, for a long while, Negro females were better educated than Negro males, and this remains true today for the Negro population as a whole.

it may not be supposed that the Negro American community has not paid a fearful price for the incredible mistreatment to which it has been subjected over the past three centuries.
In essence, the Negro community has been forced into a matriarchal structure which, because it is to out of line with the rest of the American society, seriously retards the progress of the group as a whole, and imposes a crushing burden on the Negro male and, in consequence, on a great many Negro women as well.

There is, presumably, no special reason why a society in which males are dominant in family relationships is to be preferred to a matriarchal arrangement. However, it is clearly a disadvantage for a minority group to be operating on one principle, while the great majority of the population, and the one with the most advantages to begin with, is operating on another. This is the present situation of the Negro. Ours is a society which presumes male leadership in private and public affairs. The arrangements of society facilitate such leadership and reward it. A subculture, such as that of the Negro American, in which this is not the pattern, is placed at a distinct disadvantage.

Here an earlier word of caution should be repeated. These is much evidence that a considerable number of Negro families have managed to break out of the tangle of pathology and to establish themselves as stable, effective units, living according to patterns of American society in general. E. Franklin Frazier has suggested that the middle-class Negro American family is, if anything, more patriarchal and protective of its children than the general run of such families.27 Given equal opportunities, the children of these families will perform as well or better than their white peers. They need no help from anyone, and ask none.

While this phenomenon is not easily measured, one index is that middle class Negroes have even fewer children than middle class whites, indicating a desire to conserve the advances they have made and to insure that their children do as well or better. Negro women who marry early to uneducated laborers have more children than white women in the same situation; Negro women who marry at the common age for the middle class to educated men doing technical or professional work have only four fifths as many children as their white counterparts.

I will say this ---- the media campaigns and the institutional attacks on black men post slavery - 1950 was demonically genius. shyt even has black men, making up reasons for the shyt and blaming kids for some of the issues.

 

[Blackking]

Brother, again, enough with the compound effects of slavery. If slavery broke apart the family, then in the 1940s and 1950s you would see a 70% out-of-wed-lock pregnancy rate.. It was 20%.

You really believe this don't you? You actually believe that people prefer that narrative, lol.

Truth is that 60s programs only were thought of as a band aid to issues that already existed. IF the black situation was so grand then black women wouldn't have signed up in MASS for welfare roles in 60s and black teens wouldn't have turned to crime in the 40 50 and 60's. Most of those issues came after slavery and jim crow.