Poverty Rate by Race/Ethnicity
Black poverty state to state... Hint... California isnt first.
California doesn't have to be first in the country to prove my point.
I said that California is worse off for blacks than the Deep South, which is why blacks are leaving California. The chart proves I'm right as California has a higher black unemployment rate than all of the Deep South. I mean, the same chart could have said the opposite, but it didn't (because like I told you, this is common sense).
Moreover California's rate is artificially deflated for the numbers of blacks who leaving California whereas the Deep South's unemployment rate is artificially inflated for new arrivals.
This means that if said blacks stayed in California (because it's so great, right?) and didn't move to the South, California's unemployment rate would actually be higher than the amount it is now (which is already higher than the South's despite having an advantage in terms of migration).
Ir whitening is apples and oranges when it comes to natives vs blacks.
Why? The Natives no longer exist due to genocide (their men were killed) and race-mixing (their women were raped). That's whitening.
To imply all the mixed brazilins are whitened blacks is also utter bullshyt. You obviously dont know anything sbout argentina if you dont know about the mass italian immigration...
I never said "mixed brazilians are whitened blacks". Those are your words, not mine. I said that the black population was reduced and whitened due to IR. The fact the average Brazilian--a population of like 200 million--has black ancestry means that there had to be have been a large number of blacks to supplement all that mixing. This high IR rate coincides with the Black Brazilian's reduction in population, as it does everywhere and did in Argentina. Again: common sense.
The thing is in Latin America whitening was an official government policy whereas it was never one in America.
Whitening was indeed part of the USA's policy but only with respects to the Natives. Anti-IR (and so anti-whitening) was part of the USA's policy elsewise. It was to protect white's and it did. The side effect, of course, was that it also protected blacks. In Latin America, this was not the case, which is what we are talking about in the first place.
And the black population doubled after jim crow ended. Also the black population increased by a factor of 4 during the industrial revolution.
The black population doubled because of both anti-IR law and culture:
" Prior to the California Supreme Court's ruling in
Perez v. Sharp (1948), no court in the United States had ever struck down a ban on interracial marriage. In 1967, the
United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled in
Loving v. Virginia that anti-miscegenation laws are
unconstitutional, relying partially on
Perez."
^
Anti-IR laws were not abolished only like 50 years ago, well after Jim Crow. The policy fostered the culture which has led black Americans to where they are today.
Facts are a tricky thing breh.
Indeed, try accepting them.