WHEN INTEGRATION BECOMES COUNTER PRODUCTIVE TO PRESERVATION.
There was a time long ago when California was the land of wide open spaces and scenic beauty. Thus, humans decided to integrate into these pristine settings in order to enjoy and be a part of the beauty. However, the more humans integrated into this environment, the more it ceased to be what it was and the less attractive it has become. What happened in essence is that humans were not able to reproduce or preserve that which it tried to enjoy and be a part of. This is an example of the old adage that one cannot HAVE your cake and EAT it too.As humans, if we are attracted to something, yet our immersion or usage of it erodes or dilutes it, our behavior patterns are hence destructive or out of balance with nature. There are many examples of life where something that attracts us is eroded or changed by our integration or actualizing into that what attracts us. Take for example music and the Blues or Jazz genre. What effect did white integration into these genres have upon those genres? These were distinctly black phenomenon in the beginning and many people of all races loved it. However, when white artist integrated into the genres, were they successful in reproducing what was or did they make it better or worse?
I was reading a debate between some white Rastafarians and black Rastafarians about the direction and meaning of the “Earth movement”. Rastafarians break down their overstanding in terms of their spiritual, cultural and Earthly movements. Their "Earth movement" is essentially the teachings of Marcus Garvey and is heavily Afro centric by its nature. The white Rasta’s wanted to challenge the terminology being used in the Earth movement because they seen it a racist and exclusionary (of them). I thought to myself why would these whites be attracted to a black phenomenon, then integrate into it and try to change it from the original purpose that attracted them in the first place? Blacks did not recruit them into the movement via missionary work.
I have also heard many statements from some black men praising white women, over black women. I will not get into the details or nonsense of the specifics of the praise, but suffice with saying that they ranked white women superior for their taste. However, as much as they worship and rank these white women, they cannot reproduce white women. Thus, if they have children, they can only produce the inferior mixed offspring who is considered black in most circles. Thus, by these black men own standards, his offspring is inferior, though maybe superior in his eyes to what he could have produced with a black woman. So will he rear his daughter in such a way that she sees herself as being inferior to pure white women...will he accept the chareterization of his daugther as inferior by other black men who rank white women superior. There actions are self defeating to their interest or icons.
What about our nation and its culture? Can this nation truly celebrate and integrate diversity of peoples and cultures into this nation without actually changing the dominant culture of the nation? One must manage their expectations upon integration. If there are the expectations that things can remain the same culturally, while integrating diversity, they are sadly mistaken. For integration with anything different always has the effect of altering what was.
The question that I have is this: Are certain phenomenon worth preserving as is? Can wisdom give us the discernment to know when to have the cake and when to eat it? It seems that a good litmus test would be to understand whether your actions preserves, erodes or augments the existence of a phenomenon. If it erodes or dilutes it and it has value, then in the long run the behavior is not good, but destructive.
posted by Noah TA @ 10/14/2004 08:25:00 AM
14 comments
14 Comments:
Exploring this essays theory more, what was the ultimate effect of all those blacks who integrated into white communities some 20 years ago? What was it that attracted blacks to these communities and were the blacks able to “preserve” that which attracted them?
Many, if not most, of the communities that became integrated some 20 years ago are now today predominantly black. Thus, if part of the attraction that made blacks move into those communities was linked to “whiteness” and how whites behave and do things, then blacks integrating themselves into these communities are destructive to those environments. The reason being is that they forget that they are black and not white and cannot preserve “whiteness” while being black…no matter how much they try to be white like. Of course there are exceptions to this rule, but few communities in buffer zones between predominantly black and white communities remain integrated. These communities are only integrated in a point in time snapshot, but are really in a dynamic transition to becoming predominantly one or the other. This is true of gentrified pieces of once predominantly black areas.
The lesson in this for black people is that we have to learn to put value in ourselves and our culture because we, and know one else, can preserve, replicate and augment our culture. When we try to be like others and try to enjoy what others create, without the ability to reproduce it, it does not work because others will see us a threat to the preservation of what they value and try to keep us away or move away from us.
"I have also heard many statements from some black men praising white women, over black women. I will not get into the details or nonsense of the specifics of the praise, but suffice with saying that they ranked white women superior for their taste."
I think that is a shame that people can be that shallow, there are plusses and minusus for all types of women, fellow conservative brotherhood blogger Avery http://averytooley.com/stereo/ has had some hilarious posts and discussions about how he loves ladies with back. But in the end relationships between people should be between people not fictionized fantasies.
But in addtion to relationship you are discusing location for living (community intergration). I don't think that was driven to be white. I think it driven primarily for class reasons. Back in the day there were rich white areas, poor white areas and black Areas.
Once they were no longer held back by overt racism upperclass blacks wanted to move away from poor people and that usually ment into white neighboorhoods.
I don't think these people are upset when the area turns from 3% black to 70% black. What they care about is when property values go down.
I think it obvious that there are pluses and minuses for all women. I think the point that when some black folk summarize these pluses and minuses, it ends up with a higher total for white women than black women.
Class has something to do with where people want to live. However, just as there are white people who associate blacks with “lower class” behavior, regardless of their income being “upper and Middle” , there are black folks who think this same way. Thus, their goal is to integrate into white communities. You see that’s the erroneous assumption most people make. People do not judge class by “income”. Rather, they judge class by “Behavior” or perceived behavior.
Thats what kills me about NegroCons...they fall for white rhetoric and propaganda in the quest to be accepted by them. THe fact that Scott does not realize that black behavior is not judged by their income...but rather the perception of "black culture" astounds me. THe fact that scott believes, by his statements, that all white folks is conscerned about is black income (the demarcation of class) parity in their community is unbelievable. Most white people do not say ..."as long as black people make as much money as us...we have no problem with them coming to our communities." Rather, what they say is this: "as long as blacks peolple cut their grass, keep their home up, not keep up a lot of noise..ect". Thus, they are more worried about behavior than income class...and most whites assume black culture and or genetics produces bahavior differnt from what they feel comfortable with. It has little to do with income or class of the black people.
You misunderstood my statement, "I don't think these people are upset when the area turns from 3% black to 70% black. What they care about is when property values go down" I was talking about the black people who moved into white neighboorhood that is now black.
I was adressing your point that "What was it that attracted blacks to these communities and were the blacks able to “preserve” that which attracted them?"
I had a simple point that black motivations are logical and primarily economic. Better schools, better home value appreciation, safer neighboorhoods, more places to shop etc etc.
As I said there have always been poor white neighboorhoods, I don't think you see black people trying to move into those.
(also Noah, are you bipolar or are two people posting under your name ? Your last two comment were almost opposite in tone and content.)
Also note, I never comment on how white people think, I am not white and as a black person the only logical way to assume they are thinking is as racist crackers.
You seem to spend a lot of time thinking about what white people think. It doesn't matter. What matters is the way they act. And they way we act.
Also: "as long as peolple cut their grass, keep their home up, not keep up a lot of noise..etc"." is how white people treat each other. Its all about keeping up the value of their assets.
Take a look at my essay about NCLB to understand this mentality.
Why are White Blue State liberals against NCLB
http://blacksforbush.blogspot.com/2004/05/why-are-white-blue-state-liberals.html
Scott keeps hollering about how white folk are afraid of loosing their property value. Maybe you should spend some time looking into the phenomena of property value decreasing and increasing and how it relates to race. How does white folk living in an area gives it higher value but when black folk move in the value goes down. The land is the land right? This should tell you that the assigned value is based on where white folk want to live. If white folk live in a particular place where other white folk would like to live the value goes up, however, if white folk do not want to live there the value goes down. This does not have a damn thing to do with how Black folk keep their community. There are plenty of communities on the far South Side of Chicago that were always decent black communities but yet the price of the homes never increased, when the white folk started moving in, the price of everything went up. They did not do anything special to the community, there were no changes made, the communities were not drug infested or crime ridden, however just by the mere presence of white folk the property value increased so much that Black folk that had been their for decades could no longer afford to live their because of the high property taxes. This is called Gentrification Scott, a euphemism for whites running up the value of Black land to push us out.
Scott, your lack of knowledge is not longer surprising to me. The value of homes is based upon and subject to the law of supply and demand. The largest and most powerful economic market force that determines home appreciation rates is white demand…not black demand. Thus, when whites lose interest in a area, it loses its maximum appreciation potential. The reason being is that whites incomes are much greater than blacks and there are far more whites than blacks. Moreover, when metropolitan government and councils decide to control growth or “Sprawl” that has an effect of constraining supply or forcing supply inwards, where the cost of land is more expensive, instead of outward, where land is cheaper. However, the trend of whites to move out to Exurbia (past the inner ring suburbs) out into the countryside with larger lot sizes and fewer minorities, has the effect of reducing the potential appreciation growth of previously integrated or white communities which have become predominantly black.
In short, home appreciation rate, or the maximization there of, is obtained by white demand. Thus, blacks moving into such communities and number cannot preserve this because whites will ultimately flee and find less demand for areas whose trends are increasing in minority demographics. You seem to lack a fundamental understanding of the power of being white in this society and how it affects black people negatively. Further exacerbating the reduced rate of appreciation for newly black communities is that upwardly mobile blacks are seemingly attempting to chase or mimic whites by moving farther away, which then reduces the potential demand for these new black suburban areas.
By the way, blacks have been moving into poor working class communities too…with the same effect of whites eventually moving away. How the heck do you think that Detroit went from being a city nearly all white in the 1920’s to a city nearly all black in 2004? Blacks had to move from into poor white neighborhoods in the city to eventually become the majority.
Yes, I am concerned about what white folks think. If you are naïve enough to believe that not knowing what white folks and thinking and plotting is not of value to you….then you are simply a SUCKER. Keep your friends close and those who may be enemies to your interest even closer.
Guys you have totally lost the point of you post. Which is that black people what to be white, they want to live next to whites because they are white this is not the case.
Nothing in your last two post supports the thesis of your post. In fact they both support my counter argument that blacks are looking for economic advantage.
Scott...you losing me man...Who has economic advantage in this society...ANSWER...WHITES. Thus, blacks seeking econmic advantage attempt to link themselves with....WHITES. As I said...this is self defeating in the long run because they cannot preserve WHITENESS.
But thats not true, yes whites have the majority of wealth in America but to look at it as group wealth is innacurate and meaningless. The fact Bill Gates alone has more wealth than 40% of the U.S. population combined, or 120 million people means very little to the average white guy working in a gas station.
http://www.worldrevolution.org/Projects/Features/Inequality/USInequality.htm
Yes black people as my Harvard MBA/JD former student said trade at a discount but so what, I don't have enough money to get noticed by black enterprise but I better off than the majority of white Americans.
Yes is significantly harder for blacks to make it in America, we start off at a disadvatage and we have extra walls to climb over, so what. If you work hard, don't blow you money on useless shit you will do just fine in this country black or white.
If you are a fuck up and you are black you are screwed for life, if you are a fuck up and are white you get two or three second chances then you are screwed for life.
So what, life is hard wear a fucking helmet.
No amount of agitation is going to make you white and make them treat you fairly. Get over your obsession with whiteness and learn to deal with reality.
Spoken like a “true” white man Scott. Your use of the Bill Gates example show your lack of statistical intelligence. Yes, people like Bill Gates does slightly skew the data for whites, As Operah Winfrey and all the black athletes and entertainers more significantly skews income averages for whites. That is why people use the “MEAN”, which is the middle figure that represents half being above the number and half below. There is no skewing of the data using the mean and Bill Gates high income and wealth is thus neutralized. In the “mean” or “median” comparison, of income and wealth, whites have 10 times the wealth and about 1.5 times the income of blacks.
You sound frustrated with our talking about the black white divide in America. Why? it’s a problem that is a reality. Why would you rather have us focus on the divide that you talk to harp on…which is that conservative/liberal BS? You would rather talk about that because it simply focuses on philosophical competition about which cookie cutter approach is best for the nation. Its BS because cookie cutter approaches will always find benefit for some and no benefit, if not a liability, for others. Thus, it’s a perpetual pendulum swing back and forth between the two philosophies in order to benefit all in one degree or another.
I will make a deal with you Scott. When you and others end your constant harping on politics….then comeback and ask me to end my harping on race…and I might give your request some thought. Meanwhile, it is you who need to just get over and accept the fact that actions produce reactions and whites are not going free pass on being responsible for creating the economic gaps between blacks and whites, as shown by empirical evidence. You need to accept the fact that as long as it is true…we will be placing the blame on the white man….which might be you.
Also Scott, it is very interesting that you made the statement "You need to get over your obsession with white. No amount of aggitation will make you white..". Whose is being aggitated about this essay...only you apparently? Why are you aggitated? Is it because you are white? If you read the essay carefully and my comments, you will see that my recommendation was for black people to invest in themselves because we can reproduce and augment who and what we are, but we cannot chase and try to be a benifactor or part of "whiteness" because we cannot preserve or reproduce that which attracts us to them.
Despite this being stated cleary....you were so aggitated that you simply became visceral in your nonsense response.
You might believe you said " you will see that my recommendation was for black people to invest in themselves because we can reproduce and augment who and what we are" but you didn't.
You wrote how black people are wanting to be white and they try to be white by dating white women and by moving into white neighborhoods. Your essay is about want, and beauty and spirit.
I think your analysis of BLACK peoples motives are wrong. And I believe it is you who are obsessed with whiteness and white women so you preach against it like someone afraid of falling to the temptation.
I mean you live in a fucking white city you moved to for god sake and you are preaching against doing what you have done to make yourself personally succesful.
You are seriously bi-polar.
If you look at the first comment of this essay, which is my comment, I clearly stated what blacks should do in the last paragraph. Thus, you saying that I only "thought" is said it is simply more of your lying or ignorance.
Scott, you are WEAK...WEAK....WEAK. If you have to lie or distort my clear statements in order to defend your position...you are simply a weak and dishonest man.
Maybe I am repressing some subconscious deep seated love and desire of white women Scott. All I can tell you is that the repression has been a resounding success...because I find the typical black women much more attractive for me than the typical white women. Maybe the love and respect I have for my Mom and the other black women in my family has something to do with the repression of my secrete love and desire for white women. It biases me that I had such great black women and role models of that genders ability to define to me what a women is. I had no such white women in my famile to set such a template...thus, this bias of experience has let to my repressing my logical intellect that would clearly have me seek the supeior white women, because everyone knows that white women are the appex of femminity and grace...plus, they are endowed with those nice round backsides that we black folk culturally love....one day when I come to me senses...I am going to see If I can get me a white girl like you did.
Post a Comment
<< Home