Essential The Official ADOS Discussion Thread

[voltronblack]

Democratic lawmakers argued that African Americans have faced "intergenerational trauma" in the U.S.

"When you analyze the landscape of the country, and when you see the leaders of our corporations, the CEOs, the majority of the presidents of this country, and when you look at who in this nation has wealth and power and influence and it doesn't represent you, that is a trauma in and of itself," said New York Democratic Rep. Jamaal Bowman at a news conference with Texas Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, lead sponsor of H.R. 40.

"The impact of 244 years of the enslavement of our ancestors, the transatlantic slave trade, the colonialism of Africa, on and on and on," he added. "This is all a collective trauma that continues to be repeated. And when George Floyd was murdered, we all got to experience that trauma together, the nation did and the world did."

Bowman said intergenerational trauma impacts African American children today.

"It's so powerful that we now have research to support the intergenerational trauma that our people have experienced throughout American history," he said. "It is undeniable. It is time, way past time, to form a commission to study the impact of these traumas on our people."

Dr. Kenneth S. Nave from Chicago joined the Democratic lawmakers at the press conference. He argued that the traumatic experiences that African Americans experienced during slavery in the 1700s and 1800s have an effect on their relatives today.

"We are carrying these epigenetic markers in our genes and in our body," he said. "And so when you come into a certain environmental influence, this person can then begin to mimic the pathology that was suffered by their ancestors. This is no longer theory. Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome; but this is no longer a theory. It's an actual fact that the trauma that has been imposed upon your ancestors will carry on into your genes."

"Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome" was written by Dr. Joy DeGruy Leary and released in 2005.

The Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act sets up the commission to "address the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery in the United States and the 13 American colonies between 1619 and 1865 and to establish a commission to study and consider a national apology and proposal for reparations for the institution of slavery."

The 13 colonies were under the control of Great Britain until the U.S. gained its independence in 1776.

Lee suggested renaming the legislation.

"Black people have never used excuses, but I think it is crucial that we have people who are addressing our issues to be informed," she said. "That is what H.R. 40 is all about: The commission to study slavery and develop reparation proposals, maybe we should say 'develop answers to the questions.'"

Lee invited Dr. Joan Kaufman of the Kennedy Krieger Institute to address the public at the news conference.

Kaufman said most of the research on "transgenerational epigenetic inheritance" has been conducted with animals but some studies have been done on humans.

"We've heard transgenerational epigenetic inheritance is when the negative effects of adversities and trauma in one generation can be passed down to affect the health and well-being of future generations; grandchildren and great grandchildren can be negatively impacted by ancestral traumas, even when they have not been directly harmed themselves," she said.

"So how do we know that trauma in one generation can affect the health and well-being of future generations?" she continued. "Most of the research to date has been done in animals, and it is very compelling. But studies in humans have also shown when ancestors were exposed to trauma, poor nutrition or toxic chemicals, it could impact the health of descendants for several generations."

Lee said the reparations study bill currently has 194 Democratic cosponsors.

"I think that we are clearly on the move," she said. "As we stand here today, there are poster boards that depict some of the trauma that we have been experiencing. And the hanging continued into the 20th century, which was just, as some would say, the other day."

Utah Republican Rep. Burgess Owens, an opponent of the reparations study bill, has said it is "unfair and heartless to give Black Americans the hope that this is a reality."

 

[voltronblack]

 

[voltronblack]

As of May 2021, the median US home price, as reported by the National Association of Realtors, stood at $350,300. Even with low interest rates, that’s a high barrier for many people. Nationally, the gap in homeownership rates for Black households compared to white households is large and growing. At present, 44.6 percent of Black Americans live in homes they own, compared to 74.2 percent for white Americans. That’s a stunning gap of nearly 30 percentage points.

And when Black households do own, their equity is lower; the median housing equity for white families is $118,000, compared to $60,000 for Black families. On top of this, families of color are more likely to live to inadequate housing, 5.8 percent of Black homeowners compared to 3.1 percent of white homeowners.

This lower rate of Black homeownership is a direct result of limited access to the financial market. Only five percent of conventional market were loans to Black borrowers, compared to 15 percent of the federally subsidized Federal Housing Administration and Veterans Affairs loans. In 2019, a group of 10 lenders were responsible for originating 24 percent of mortgage loans to Black borrowers; of those 10, only three were traditional depository banks. Black applicants are more than twice as likely to have their loan applications rejected.


Barriers to BIPOC Homeownership in Low-Cost Cities
While national home prices have reached record highs, homes are not expensive everywhere. In Detroit, Michigan, for instance, the median home costs about $70,000. Yet even here families of color struggle to buy homes. Why?

Well, banks often refuse to lend to potential homeowners in these lower valued homes for many reasons. Two critical ones: the cost of servicing the loan is the same whether the loan is for $50,000 or $500,000—the larger loans are more profitable; the low-cost loans are money-losers. Also, the lower price means that people who need a mortgage compete with people paying cash, and, as the saying goes, “cash is king” (or queen). This flawed system perpetuates and exacerbates racial inequalities with a vast percentage of Black households hitting said roadblocks when attempting to obtain financing for affordable housing.

What can be done? The nonprofit I direct, the Center for Community Progress (CCP), seeks to align mission-driven and flexible lenders, with public funding and philanthropic dollars, to mitigate the challenges that exist with small principal mortgages and incentivizing their widespread adoption. This means working not just with banks, but also community development financial institutions (CDFI), credit unions, and others. Recognizing the varied characteristics of each institution, and how they can aid in helping to address the gap between financing tools and lower valued inventory is important to properly address the problem. Part of the solution is partnering with a fund for land banks to rehabilitate properties to increase the quality of available inventory. This, in conjunction with generating affordable first residential mortgages that are less than $100,000, can make a real difference in helping millions of BIPOC families become homeowners.

 

[Captain Crunch]

@HarlemHottie @Nicole0416_646NYC
New York Moves to Allow 800,000 Noncitizens to Vote in Local Elections

 

[HarlemHottie]

@HarlemHottie @Nicole0416_646NYC
New York Moves to Allow 800,000 Noncitizens to Vote in Local Elections

 

[saturn7]

Politics In BLACK - The Case for Lineage Reparations

 

[saturn7]

CA Reparations TASK FORCE 2-Day (DEC) Mtg

 

[voltronblack]

 

[voltronblack]

 

[voltronblack]

 

[saturn7]

Stop Biden Administration from using Freedmen's Bank Legacy for all minority groups

https://www.change.org/p/stop-biden-administration-from-using-freedmen-s-bank-legacy-for-all-minority-groups?utm_content=cl_sharecopy_31795083_en-US%3A4&recruiter=1170234718&recruited_by_id=5a033e60-42e8-11eb-b67e-81d1e1c70ea9&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_initial&utm_term=psf_combo_share_message&share_bandit_exp=initial-31795083-en-US

The Biden administration is using the legacy of the Freedman's Bank which was plundered and looted by greedy White politicians during, and after the Reconstruction era. Black American Freedmen deposited upwards of $57 million in hard earned savings into the Freedman's Savings Bank only to have their hard earned savings stolen and the bank ultimately failing without Freedmen being paid back one dime. Today, that 57 million would be a little more than $9 billion dollars, the same amount that the Biden administration will give to every one but the descendants of those Freedmen. The Biden Administration is attempting to use the Freedmen Bank's legacy to implement financial investments into "minority" groups which usually excludes the neediest Black Americans.

This egregious act of using the plight of Black American Freedmen is usufruct. We, the descendants of the Freedmen demand that the Dept. of Treasury repurpose its policy to only allocate funds to the Freedmen of today or, discontinue using the name of the Freedman's Bank under the guise that Black Americans stand to benefit when in fact, immigrants and minorities will be its main recipients.

This is a call to action from the United Sons & Daughters of Freedmen to take a stand against this blatant act of disrespect. Getting the Biden administration and the Dept. of Treasury to either change its policy, or discontinue the usage of the name of our Freedmen ancestors, will play a major part in taking back our narrative.

 

[saturn7]

Even Harvard was forced to lean back!!!

 

[Asicz]

Harvard journal retracts paper on Black advocacy in elections

 

[CBSkyline]

I'm reading through the retraction right now, and damn, this shyt looks bad for the writers who wrote this piece. It's a wrap for their academic career, or you would think so. I don't know how you go on tour or teach about misinfo, when your work got pulled and teeters on the realm of being misinfo itself. That article should have never seen the light of day based on how they worded their initial thoughts in the retraction. This Abrahams cat cutting up the whole team line by line, and Harvard themselves fell on the sword on some "Yeah we messed this one up and we changing how we doing things going forward"

Overall, it is evident that the way that Nkonde et al 2021 collected data limited their visibility into social media activity by the ADOS founders, which in turn biased their view of them. Even among the tweets that they did collect, however, those that were potentially exonerative were not surfaced in the journal article.

But what about the tweets that they did analyze? Here we would argue that the interpretations offered by the authors were neither rigorous nor balanced.

The reviewers opinion on Tonetalks and the accusation levied against him and Yvette that they didn't care or mentioned COVID...

Next, the rebuttal takes on Nkonde et al 2021’s allegation that ADOS exhibits a “lack of concern with the continuing wave of the COVID crisis”. The rebuttal points to a YouTube video uploaded by Antonio Moore (@tonetalks; see the video at ) on February 27, 2020, cautioning viewers to take the virus seriously, and to be careful of disinformation (for example, a claim that African-Americans are uniquely safe from the virus due to genetic advantages). Moore proceeds to highlight several reputable articles (by The Guardian, NPR, Slate, etc) providing guidance about the virus. The video itself has received over 21 thousand views to date, suggesting it was by no means ignored. Naturally, the YouTube video does not fall within the Twitter dataset, but again, in view of the decision by Nkonde et al 2021 to focus on @breakingbrown and @tonetalks, the decision to ignore the YouTube channel of @tonetalks (with 81.2k subscribers as of August 6, 2021) risked filtering out useful information, as this video confirms.

This is a big story and as complete of an exoneration as you can get. The retraction backs up what that NYT writer found as well. More accusations than evidence of nefarious activities. It's going to be interesting to see how everyone moves going forward.

 

[saturn7]

I'm reading through the retraction right now, and damn, this shyt looks bad for the writers who wrote this piece. It's a wrap for their academic career, or you would think so. I don't know how you go on tour or teach about misinfo, when your work got pulled and teeters on the realm of being misinfo itself. That article should have never seen the light of day based on how they worded their initial thoughts in the retraction. This Abrahams cat cutting up the whole team line by line, and Harvard themselves fell on the sword on some "Yeah we messed this one up and we changing how we doing things going forward"





The reviewers opinion on Tonetalks and the accusation levied against him and Yvette that they didn't care or mentioned COVID...





This is a big story and as complete of an exoneration as you can get. The retraction backs up what that NYT writer found as well. More accusations than evidence of nefarious activities. It's going to be interesting to see how everyone moves going forward.

IIRC Tone was one of the first Black Youtubers taking COVID seriously, telling folks to stock up on supplies and masks, and not pushing tin foil conspiracy bullshyt (Boyce, Tariq, Rizza and all you melanated Khemetic know-it-all types I'm talking about YOU nikkaS!!).

If only DNC bootlickers in The Locker Room and HL would retract all the false statements they made about ADOS.