Bulworth got it overtly right. I believe Cobb's unstated motive is Bulworthian.

Maslow forgot about generative imperatives, and in so doing, he neglected THE prime mover. As go these generative *instincts* so also the contingent levels of the hierarchy of needs.

IMOHO - the entirety of the culture war is about seignurial primacy and privilege.., here's a working title proposal, Who's Ya Daddy?" Progressive Patriarchy in the Fin d'Siecle American Republic

I believe Cobb's unstated motive is Bulworthian.

Bullshittian, this time.

Maslow forgot about generative imperatives, and in so doing, he neglected THE prime mover.

It's like the set of all sets...that which is universal may be ignored. 

LATER: Okay, the generative imperitives are in the biological group, level one. I was just blowing you off for not paying attention before you get all verbally gymnasty.

Would it be good for black folk if either of these two things generally occurred over say 40 years:

1. white folk became more aware of the impact of their racist reactions (much as men generally improve in this regard over their lifetimes), and reacted appropriately

2. black folk became mentally inoculated, and treated racist behavior as a general nusiance along with other rudeness, but being well trained/developed to not let it get them down

They strike me like bandages for a deep wound. I'd rather have them, and someone should do that while I order up this penicillin.

Less metaphorically, these steps still assume racism is a personal relationship rather than a power relationship. In and of themselves they are not solutions but doing them or not would affect how the solution manifests.

Black folk should act so as to divest themselves of any subordinate interdependence. Go amish, hasidic, whatever intragroup model maximizes local autonomy and capability.

America could not be trusted to do the right thing during the period of greatest-ever human material surplus. During the impending economic crash, scarcity, and resource wars, American behaviour in the face of massive dopamine withdrawal will make even reptiles seem angelic by comparison.

Less metaphorically, these steps still assume racism is a personal relationship rather than a power relationship.

If we eliminated all interpersonal racist actions, we'd still be left with something? 

That's a high probability outcome. That's why my focus on the collective aspect, getting Black folks to recognize and act to support the connection that's already there.

Fact is, though, the societal outcome will be affected by the nature of the connection to the mainstream...and don't you dare be absurd and claim the Amish, Hasidim or whoever has no such connection.

To the degree that it doesn't disrupt the issue of primary importance to Black folk, I have no real issue targeting white folks for some of the analysis. 

If we eliminated all interpersonal racist actions, we'd still be left with something?

Yes, the accrued result of past racist actions.

Nobody really cares if racists don't like them. We don't like racists either. But an illegitimate power relationship caused all this, and fed it until it became structural. THAT is what must be disassembled, and Black folks cannot do that on an individual basis.

It's a collective problem, and therefore requires a collective solution. 

Okay, the generative imperitives are in the biological group, level one. I was just blowing you off for not paying attention before you get all verbally gymnasty.

Without going gymnasty, generative threat avoidance seems to me the only plausible level one motivation for historic white flight and continuing self-segregation to maintain segregated schooling, worship, and generalized socialization.

gotta keep'm separated!!!

I believe that the observed behaviours bear out this contention.

Seriously empty point as regards the current thread.

unless the proposed book proves beyond any doubt to white america that mixed race children are the key to their future, the notion of such a book is far and away the emptiest point.

no way, no how, any amount of discussion - no matter how compelling - is going to knock a dent into that deep recess of the american psyche.

unless the proposed book proves beyond any doubt to white america that mixed race children are the key to their future

Can you offer your analysis of racial issues in Mexico, cnulan?  At least superficially, massive mixing doesn't seem to have solved anything.

How about India?  Same general dynamic as Mexico. 

On the other hand, there's California. 

unless the proposed book proves beyond any doubt to white america that mixed race children are the key to their future, the notion of such a book is far and away the emptiest point.

You're just being an ass now. 

If we eliminated all interpersonal racist actions, we'd still be left with something?

Yes, the accrued result of past racist actions.

Would you describe that as a cultural deficiency?  I mean, I can parse the words and make linguistic sense, but what actually has accrued?

"Black folk should act so as to divest themselves of any subordinate interdependence. Go amish, hasidic, whatever intragroup model maximizes local autonomy and capability."

cnulan, we tried that back in the sixities. Back then we called it "black nationalism." The experiments of that era resulted in everything from Kwanza to the Republic of New Africa (which advocated that all blacks move to the south and achieve local political control via demographic dominance). These experiments failed to achieve the paramount goal of maximizing our "autonomy and capability" because we lacked the vision needed to unite black folks across the real and divisive fault lines of caste, class, and religion. We even looked to the solidarity of immigrant groups for inspiration and justification (the Jewish community was a typical exemplar in this type of thinking).

Three things destabilized and destroyed the movement before it could really gain traction: (1) Capitalism (black folks have embraced the acquisitiveness and consumerism that are the hallmarks of the American ethos, and a large segment were bought off with "poverty" programs and other cosmetic handouts; (2) Cointelpro (the government through its counterintelligence agencies and programs systematically murdered and terrorized the radical and progressive black leadership and their loyal soldiers); (3) Drugs (beginning in the early seventies, black communities across the US were deluged with tons of cocaine and heroin).

You're just being an ass now.

Nope. I have intimate subjective experience with the issue of racism from a perspective which I suspect you do not. Though it's absurd on the face of it to talk about mixed-races, I have observed black, white, and mexican relatives come to terms and fail to come to terms with racial consensus realities in ways I suspect you have not. To me, their ability or inability constitutes a litmus test like no other, specifically that of the social construct wheel meeting the blood kin road.

If I'm mistaken about your experience, by all means set me straight. But here-to-date, I haven't seen anything that you've written that suggests an intimate familiarity with the question from this perspective. Matter of fact, I'd go so far as to call the bus incident and any like it pretty much racism lite. That's why I cast the issue in terms of seigneurial privileges and deep psychic resistance to changing the same.

Having seen parents disown children over issues of race and love, and fools loving their identity pathologies more than they love their own children has proven deeply enlightening....,

Can you offer your analysis of racial issues in Mexico, cnulan? At least superficially, massive mixing doesn't seem to have solved anything.

How about India? Same general dynamic as Mexico.

Have you ever spent much if any time in either place among various of the infinitely varied people you can find there?

Disregarding the histories which parallel American in almost no regard, don't you think you'd at least be within driving distance of the city in which the ballpark you're hypothetically hunting for is situated DW if you drew the comparison say between America and Cuba, or America and Brazil, or even America and Venezuela - which is now ruled by a mixed race black and indian popularly elected president. They at least have in common slavery in their respective econo-historical woodpiles...,

Next?

Three things destabilized and destroyed the movement before it could really gain traction: (1) Capitalism (black folks have embraced the acquisitiveness and consumerism that are the hallmarks of the American ethos, and a large segment were bought off with "poverty" programs and other cosmetic handouts;

This isn't capitalism O, it's consumerism. The reason black nationalism failed is because it didn't spawn any economic opportunity for nationalists and young people who might have been attracted to the same. Nationalists didn't become producers of anything valuable. Certain cells within NBUF, for example, realize the errors of their politically active but economically impotent ways and are now working to correct past oversights.

The hasidim and amish, (mennonites are the anabaptists I know best and who prevail in these parts) all have their own economies. While the diamond trade and farming and food production are about as far removed from one another as is imaginable, what they share in common is providing the resources to sustain and economically viable polity or way of life.

Technology and agriculture are keys to an autonomous afrofuture. The Cuban economic model includes intensive urban agriculture.

Nope. I have intimate subjective experience with the issue of racism from a perspective which I suspect you do not. Though it's absurd on the face of it to talk about mixed-races, I have observed black, white, and mexican relatives come to terms and fail to come to terms with racial consensus realities in ways I suspect you have not.

Craig, don't ever expect me to take you seriously when you just drop crap with no support.

Nothing to do with the topic. Write about it at Vision Circle. 

I'm seriously annoyed, Craig. I was looking for actual answers...I always am when I ask a question here. And you diverted the thread with patent bullshit.

Alrighty then Earl, I'll stop pussyfooting around.

Whatever David Myers lacks in poise and carefully constructed analysis, there'll be a subjective dimension available to him that will always be lacking in your treatment of the subject. If he could articulate real emotional content, hypothetically it might make a difference. Theatre or cinema would be the venue for such an exposition. Your clinical approach, in a book, is a dead message in a dead medium and utterly incapable of conveying the real emotional content required for transformative provocation. A couple of years ago, I saw just such an autobiographical production, exceedingly well done, and it was a jarring exposition for the audience. Today, I couldn't tell you the brother's name who wrote and performed it - to save my life.

My background shares a slight similarity to Mr. Myer's. My poor white maternal grandmother had a daughter with a zootsuiter. As a result, she was disowned by her parents and other white relatives and she and her daughter were not accepted into babydaddy chicano family as she had imagined she would be. Her daughter, who was raised white, had a son (me) with an exceedingly talented artist and jazz drummer, my father. For this unpardonable act of miscegeny, my mother was in turn disowned by her mother who had been disowned by her parents a generation previously. I believe my existentials are now established, but continuing for emphasis..,

As an infant, I was adopted by my father's sister and her husband who raised me in the heart of a black community, but with the constant imperative to integrate, integrate, integrate, thru church and school as they themselves had set out to do. A little integrationism goes a long way, and by the time I was a teenager, I was sick to death of going along to get along.

My biological mother returned to her life of white delusion as her mother had before her, subject to profound disillusionment sometime during the late 70's resulting in a la raza personal revolution and adoption of her father's surname. Late in life, each experienced a too little too late parental/grandparental epiphany and the catastrophic regrets that such realizations inevitably bring.

For my entire life then, I have experienced and observed black, white and chicano culture up close and personal. Unfiltered first hand familial access and exposure to each - has led me to conclude that the fundamentals are simply human. Fathers and mothers can be deeply offended by sons and daughters who don't select mates reflecting the parental weltanschaung, many take it as a form of rejection. Not only, but there is all the post hoc "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" consternation and social fallout to be expected from miscegenistic misbehaviour. Thus, the simplest method for avoiding these dramatic possibilities is to keep the fertile and individuating young'ns separated.

As for my personal election of black culture, I've clung to the cultural logic, language and values of my parents, minus their integrationist urges. In my experience, only black culture confers a degree of immunity from the colorstruck pathologies of the other folks. So as a practical matter, levels two, three and four implemented in black, period. Seems to me the whole shooting match reduces to making black embodiment so powerful that it becomes irresistable to both children and parents alike. Put that shit in a book, and it would truly be life changing. Better still, just do it.

cnulan I thank you for your personal statement.

secondly, I thank you for the profound statement that family is stronger than anything else.  That's not how the story reads, but as I read your story, I kept encountering pain. "Disowned? what the fuck are these people thinking? What's their goal?" I don't in the slightest expect that you would do other than reject such, and reject it in both primary and secondary ways. To resolve that that ain't me.  There's no way to read your story except as a plea for stronger family ties.

You can't allow yourself to be defined by a weak family.  Pick the best parts and the best examples, of which as you point out there are many. Supercede the rest. It's tough to do.

Your clinical approach, in a book, is a dead message in a dead medium and utterly incapable of conveying the real emotional content required for transformative provocation.

You, brother, have no idea what can be done with words. Here's a hint: lyric and mythic modes. You know I'm capable of dealing surgically with this shit because you've seen it...and as I recall the conversation ended with something like "Oh! Now I understand what you're saying." 

As for personal experience, I parallel your parents, not you. I was a participant in the dance you merely observed, difference being my daughter's mom was Japanese and Irish.

Make no assumptions about me. 

Your whole commentary, moving as it is, can be reduced to the last paragraph for my purposes. And though I understand your clinging to what helped you make it through the night, I also understand that myriads of people have made it through on paths considerably different in detail than yours or mine. My path leads me to search out and identify the human needs each of these paths meet (or fail to). I set about meeting them for myself and let everything fall into place around that.

I've just given you the heart of my practice. Everything else is a matter of implementation inthe current circumstances.

Now stop hijacking all the goddamn threads. 

"The reason black nationalism failed is because it didn't spawn any economic opportunity for nationalists and young people who might have been attracted to the same."

I don't think it's a matter of economic opportunity, cnulan. It's a matter of economic system, which brings us back to capitalism. To say capitalism is not a problematic in the development of the black political consciousness that you discussed earlier in this thread is to dismiss the root causes of our exploitation and the ideological and economic forces with which we must contend to achieve liberation. The failure of black nationalism was a failure to educate the collective as to the real alternatives that exist to the capitalist status quo. The mere mention of the word socialism in our community is most often greeted with confusion, contempt, or fear--reactions grounded in misinformation and ignorance.

I also should point out that not all black nationalist movements lacked alternative economic models. They lacked the vision to communicate and implement those ideas and foster real change in the economic philosophy of the majority members of the black community. They had to compete from within the infrastructure of a capitalist ethos that distorts or co-opts all forms of dissent or rebellion (consider hiphop).

"Technology and agriculture are keys to an autonomous afrofuture. The Cuban economic model includes intensive urban agriculture."

The Cuban economic model is a socialist, albeit a Maxist model. This is my point exactly. None of the objectives of black liberation can be achieved within a capitalist system. Any liberation movement that attempts to function thusly will remain complicit in the mechanisms of exploitation and oppression in general, and complicit in the exploitation of its own members.

If we eliminated all interpersonal racist actions, we'd still be left with something?

Yes, the accrued result of past racist actions.

Would you describe that as a cultural deficiency?  I mean, I can parse the words and make linguistic sense, but what actually has accrued?

Who do I answer? If I'm answering you (who knows already) I get a bit snippy.

Is this a person that thinks racism is nothing but personal bad acting?

All of which does give me an idea...

Is this a person that thinks racism is nothing but personal bad acting?

P6, in this and other cases you assume I know when I don't know.  I'm willing to go there, but yes. Racism seems like a collection of bad actions.

Assume for the moment that I started out believing racism was over ca 1964, except for a few nut cases neither one of us care much about, beyond agreeing that they exist and need an eye kept on them.

Then I become aware of modern racism, in the form of that collection of racist actions.  This understanding becomes the foundation of my analysis. 

It follows that a life, particularly a formative life, of exposure to racism would have a typically negative effect.  It does not follow (directly) that this effect accumulates over generations. But then there's the bad-parenting cycle, a modern example of negative effects transcending generations. So it's not implausible, but it't not particularly intuitive either.

It remains difficult to think about. 

All of which does give me an idea...

yeah? 

"Then I become aware of modern racism, in the form of that collection of racist actions.  This understanding becomes the foundation of my analysis."

That pretty well sums up why your analysis has been so faulty: it's not based on scholarship, it's not based on experience, it's mostly just opinion and thinly disguised guesswork. In other words, it lacks any discernable foundation other than your own confusion.

I suggested some readings that could help you form an informed opinion. But you don't want to do any homework. You'd rather continue to spout these absurdities: 

"It follows that a life, particularly a formative life, of exposure to racism would have a typically negative effect.  It does not follow (directly) that this effect accumulates over generations. But then there's the bad-parenting cycle, a modern example of negative effects transcending generations. So it's not implausible, but it't not particularly intuitive either."

WTF does that mean? It's utter nonsense.

I suggested some readings that could help you form an informed opinion.

One way I think I'm useful to people like you O is by being, well, white, as an analytical starting point. The number of white people who set out to analyze racism is near zero, but as you point out, that group includes some serious scholars.  I'm not suggesting that their work is inconsequential, but I do suggest that it doesn't provide a good connection to racism 40 years after 1964.

In short, they don't attempt to take a white person from the standard starting position (racism was over ca 1964) to some more enlightened point.  Now as you point out, I didn't come to that conclusion via exhaustively reading the suggested homework.  I came to it by reading reviews of the books that they wrote, and nowhere in those reviews did I see a focus on the modern context.  If you know of an analysis focused on the modern era, could you point it out specially?

I'm different (I think) from people like QB in that I retain the null hypothesis of limited racism. Not so much (now) because I believe there is no racism, but because I think it's good to develop good arguments, and good arguments are arguments which overcome that null hypothesis.

He means the link between racism that you experience and privations your child experiences as an adult is induced rather than deduced. It's plausible to him based on the cycle of (I will switch terms for clarity) domestic abuse, in which the child that experiences it usually goes on to abuse his or her own children.

The idea. A series of "letters," one per target audience...one could say one per  "big question." There's probably some 8-10 target audiences, some who need schooling, some who need support, some who need to be screamed on.

WTF does that mean? It's utter nonsense.

It asks a question.  

By what mechanism are the negative effects of racism from the distant past being passed to children alive today?

By what mechanism are the negative effects of racism from the distant past being passed to children alive today?

Distant?

40 years? Or yesterday? Remember, the problem is the power relationship. The interpersonal is easy to handle on a day-to-day, person-to-person basis. Black people have mastered that, had to from centuries back. I think that's why most of us just don't see your problem as legitimate.

Distant?

40 years?

Part of that null hypothesis. 

You responded before my edit hit, sorry about that...

Not for P6, but this null hypothesis thing isn't some game.  It's a logical way of thinking.  Start by assuming that "nothing" is true, in this case "there is no current racism".  The arguments then need to prove that hypothesis wrong.  Once proven wrong, the null hypothesis becomes "there is no racism (or effects of racism) beyond what has been shown.

A reason, beyond simple logic, that this is useful is that this matches how white people think about racism, and it points the way to real communication. 

In particular, citing the null hypothesis is not a claim that we (or I) know the answer, and the null hypothesis is that answer. 

(later: these happened out of sequence..) 

This was the question anchoring the thread;

In general, too, I wonder what folks think could be put in a book that would make a difference...not even specifically the difference I'm pursuing.

to which I initially and succinctly - albeit somewhat cryptically responded;

I was content to leave it at that until you called me a bullshitter and demanded existentials. Having provided what was intended as a clarifying bundle of these, I gets yet more unselfconscious feedback;

As for personal experience, I parallel your parents, not you. I was a participant in the dance you merely observed, difference being my daughter's mom was Japanese and Irish.

Make no assumptions about me.

Never. You mentioned that fact on AF. At the risk of projective error, and I'm not asking you to represent, from where I sit, your experience seems more likenable to that of my biologicals. I met my paternal twice, he got shanked when I was 13. My maternal is still alive, unevolved, and self-centered as she ever was. Though still breathing - genuinely not a person worth exposing my own children to.

My parents on the other hand, to whom I owe an objective debt of conscience that can never be repayed, are deceased.

Though I'm not the easiest correspondent, frankly, neither you nor DW have any inkling of where I'm coming from - and bofe of ya's gap-fill with an imaginative flourish that is more projective than accurate.

And though I understand your clinging to what helped you make it through the night, I also understand that myriads of people have made it through on paths considerably different in detail than yours or mine.

That's not how the story reads, but as I read your story, I kept encountering pain.....There's no way to read your story except as a plea for stronger family ties. You can't allow yourself to be defined by a weak family.

Make it through the night? Pain? Defined by a weak family? The totality of what I had to say on the subject boiled down to control of seigneurial privilege. i.e., who plays the role of God the Father in the lives of children in America. In the collective unconscious of America, black men have been systematically obviated from that role. Whether we're talking about the infantilism of Baby Boy or the presidential merits of Colin Powell denied, it's simply not a prerogative that America has willingly bestowed or that we have decisively asserted, by any means necessary. don't get it twisted, we wouldn't still be here if legions of black men hadn't handled their's, much as my father did for me but the fact of the matter is that it is has been systematically blocked from being installed as an American cultural archetype.

40 years? Or yesterday?

Backing up to the topic:

the accrued result of past racist actions.

Would you say this accrual is greater now than it was in 1964, that is, it has continued to accrue since 1964 (albeit at a reduced pace)?

"By what mechanism are the negative effects of racism from the distant past being passed to children alive today?"

PT tried to explain it to you in another thread. He quoted Faulkner: "The past is not past." I prefer to say: "The past is present."

Racism is embedded in the infrastructure and superstructure of this society. It doesn't require some kind of Mendelian mechanism or Freudian analysis to account for its etiology or pathological manifestations. It ain't about parenting. It's about power and privilege. It's about the institutionalization of that power and privilege. That's how it spans generations. It is not embodied in individuals. It is the ethos of a collective. It's a cultural system and the ideology upon which it is based and around which the integrity and coherence of that cultural system is defined, achieved and maintained. That's something you would learn if you bothered to do a minimal amount of study of the issues you seem addicted to mis-representing and mis-understanding.

I don't gap-fill. At all. That's how I know where the holes are. And I ain't the one that even feinted toward representing someone else's experience.

Your initial "cryptic" response was so cryptic as to be empty to anyone but yourself. That's not even an attempt at communicating. I don't know what that is. All I know is, if you want someone to know what you're saying, you are more than capable of making it so. When you do not make it so, don't expect me to reach for it. If it's on my road I'll reach it in good time. 

"In short, they don't attempt to take a white person from the standard starting position (racism was over ca 1964) to some more enlightened point.  Now as you point out, I didn't come to that conclusion via exhaustively reading the suggested homework.  I came to it by reading reviews of the books that they wrote, and nowhere in those reviews did I see a focus on the modern context.  If you know of an analysis focused on the modern era, could you point it out specially?"

What the hell is with you and 1964? If you're referring to the Civil Rights Act as some kind of antidote to racism you're delusional. Did the passage of laws against murder stop homicides?

Also, I hate to break it to you but the advent of the so-called modern era coincides with the height of the Atlantic Slave Trade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_era

Finally, reading reviews? There are no Cliff Notes for the complex issues discussed in this forum. Either you bother to educate yourself or you continue to be clueless. It's your choice. It's your problem.

IMOHO - the entirety of the culture war is about seignurial primacy and privilege.., here's a working title proposal, Who's Ya Daddy?" Progressive Patriarchy in the Fin d'Siecle American Republic

seignurial and fin d'siecle are not undefined loaner terms, they exist because the english language doesn't provide comparable usages.

both are unambiguously defined now, do with them as you see fit, or not. {you know them shizzles are tight though, so watching you come to grips with the question you posed while crankily ignoring the 800lb archetypal gorilla placed in your path -should be very interesting}

Are these threads actually call and response, or have I inadvertantly blundered into an amen chorus?

Would you say this accrual is greater now than it was in 1964, that is, it has continued to accrue since 1964 (albeit at a reduced pace)?

What has happened in the history of this country that would make you think the impact of racism isn't still accruing? I'm still not talking about interpersonal racism, about which I literally do not care personally.

Black people were consciously excluded from the economic growth of the New Deal, and every attempt to even approach helping Black people reach any kind of prosperity was actively resisted. That's your bad actions if you must go to the personal. And that resistance continues.

We'd have caught up by now, you know, had it not been for all that.

both are unambiguously defined now, do with them as you see fit, or not.

Not. Your gorilla is 800 lbs of water vapor...seriously no need to deal with it. At all. Ever.

You see, you claim it to be the only reason applicable to the first level of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, but you miss the point...not every level of need creates an imperative demand on a human. On the first level your fin de cycle doesn't even exist (as evidenced by your own existence). It's a third level demand, a condition they must meet for acceptance in a certain circle. As such it can functionally be replaced by whatever conditions are required for admission to another acceptable circle.

Stop hijacking the fucking threads. We have discussed THAT in the past too. 

What has happened in the history of this country that would make you think the impact of racism isn't still accruing?

I had thought things were better now than they were in 1960.

That the racist burden in 2005 is less than the racist burden in 1960.

No back of the bus. 

I had thought things were better now than they were in 1960.

That the racist burden in 2005 is less than the racist burden in 1960.

Has the power relationship changed? No. Are our issues only addressed when doing so benefits the mainstream more than us? Yes. Do we have the access we would have had if Black WW II veterans were treated like white WW II veterans? No. Do people still feel Black = criminal? Yes.

You're catching the sparks instead of extinguishing the fire. 

Has the power relationship changed? No. Are our issues only addressed when doing so benefits the mainstream more than us? Yes.

I had to think about this for a while.

Intererpersonal racism seemed tractable if difficult. I was beginning to understand it, at least a little bit.

Near as I can tell, what we've come to is "America is defective beyond the actions of all its citizens".  Now that's surely consistent with other comments expressed many times over.

It's tempting to reject that on its face. It seems to make no sense whatsoever. But I decided that what does make sense is to actually understand what the claim is.  To give it a chance.

Can we go slowly? I mean, feel free to try to attempt some fell swoop education, but don't assume it's going to work.

Has the power relationship changed? No

We're now in a realm which transcends individual behavior, right?  Can you explain a bit P6 the nature of power relationships which exist independently of individual behavior? 

Near as I can tell, what we've come to is "America is defective beyond the actions of all its citizens". 

If the only thing that can be is what has been, then that would be a fair statement. But no one has said it's beyond the actions of all its citizens, just that it has been and is now "defective."

Can you explain a bit P6 the nature of power relationships which exist independently of individual behavior?

Step at a time, right? Let's start with the continued criminalization of Black people.

As with drug laws?

It's not the drug laws, it's the focusing of enforcement in Black communities. Given the rate of drug use is the same across racial classifications and we know it, the obscene "over-representation" of Black folks among the arrested and convicted can only be caused by not looking at white drug users. Like iceheads...poor little victims that they are...

Across the board, the crimes white folks are likely to commit aren't taken seriously. Police in white communities are there to serve; in Black communities, it's to guard against.

Two complications.

1. While the use of marijuana, cocaine, opiates, and increasingly meth might be proportional, the distribution of these drugs is largely a non-white activity.

2. Small town local drug distribution tends to be among people who know each other, because anyone who offered drugs for sale to random people would be quickly busted.  Small town drug dealers tend to be racially representative of the city, and arrests are racially proportional.  A big city drug seller might be able to make $thousands selling to random people before being busted.  This ability to make money creates both violence associated with territory and a never-ending sequence of people willing to take the place of the arrested.

So a lot of the over-representation in prison can be understood in terms of the racial makeup of the partipants in those organized sales to random people.

But I see some of what you mean, let's not get hung up.  Is some expansion of the drug discussion what you had in mind by the "power relationship (independent of individual behavior)"?  Should we move on to "addressing our issues"? 

the distribution of these drugs is largely a non-white activity.

You must be kidding.

A big city drug seller might be able to make $thousands selling to random people before being busted.

Nope. Another illusion.  

Small town local drug distribution tends to be among people who know each other, because anyone who offered drugs for sale to random people would be quickly busted.

...and because it's a small town they KNOW who's on drugs.

Ice is the biggest law enforcement problem in "red states," as reported by law enforcement itself.

Should we move on to "addressing our issues"?

No need. I think we've shown how large the gap is in white folks' understanding of what's actually happening, how vast the job of re-educating the mainstream would be. It would be a full time job, and leave no time for what I consider to be the vital work.

Ok.

I understand a bit more where you're coming from, which is good.

Okay, here's a bit more.

Mainstream America considers race a topic of secondary importance at best. A race scholar outside the Ivy League...and most within it...will be considered b-list barring some startling discovery. Race is not considered an acceptable primary reason or motivation.

To address white folks' missing information, it must be done as a side effect of something they believe in. Like the words of the Constitution (even though most are no more familiar with it than they are the King James Bible). Justice Breyer is trying to do this in his book "Active Justice," but even with him the weakest case presented was that for affirmative action. It's an argument that can't really be made by someone who doesn't accept race as one of the primary conditions one must deal with. Active Justice and our new Chief Justice showed me the originalist judicial philosophy has carried the day. The argument must be presented in originalist terms.

And yes, I can probably do it. Active Justice is a very good starting point, and all this Constitutional analysis crap is just about words. Words are easy. I need to get the damn review done, I just keep thinking past what Justice Breyer presented.

But it wouldn't look like a race book. 

Mainstream America considers race a topic of secondary importance at best. A race scholar outside the Ivy League...and most within it...will be considered b-list barring some startling discovery. Race is not considered an acceptable primary reason or motivation.

Agreed.  There's not a lot of competition.

To address white folks' missing information, it must be done as a side effect of something they believe in. 

White folk are generally motivated to make things better for black folk. White folk are generally willing to forego that unearned privilege in the interest of fairness.  That provides the foundation for making a case.  You don't start in the hole.  That's not where the gulf is.

If the intent is to build from that foundation to a case for affirmative action, I'm sure it's been done. The problem is that it's been done in a way which is generally unconvincing unless one already accepts that past injustice can reasonably be remedied by current injustice in the other direction.  (I tried to phrase that in a sterile way, I'm sure I failed, but the intent was to identify the issue, not divert into it).

I'm not ruling out the potential that a convincing case could be made which includes affirmative action, but the gulf can't generally be crossed by simple goodwill. It can be crossed for a minority of whites by goodwill, but repeating the same case which the majority has steadfastly rejected is a dead end.

Perhaps "making a case for affirmative action" should be deferred in favor of simple progress.  Build from that foundation of goodwill what can be built, asking no favors, but compelling acceptance.

White folk are generally motivated to make things better for black folk. White folk are generally willing to forego that unearned privilege in the interest of fairness.

Then white folks need new representatives because there's been little to no sign of that from any legislation I've seen.

If the intent is to build from that foundation to a case for affirmative action, I'm sure it's been done.

That would not be the intent the intent would be to build on Breyer's "Active Liberty" concept.

current injustice in the other direction

You not only failed to identify the issue, you annoyed me a little again.

Look, if you turn right by accident, turning left to correct it is not a error. Reversing an injustice is not an injustice. If you don't get that, there's literally no point in discussing it any further.

Somewhat sadly, we arrive back home.

You're the one that insisted on going there.

I didn't read the entire thread...it's kinda long, but I would certainly argue that BLACK folks are at level 2 in Maslow's hierarchy from a collective perspective. There are far too many instances where security and safety is the principal concern of black folk. If love follows from the fulfillment of this second need, there is still considerable work to be done. Obviously, there are also millions of folks still operating at level 1. I'm thinking here of international cases, but domestically, I believe level 2 sums it up.

You're the one that insisted on going there.

Sure, and I'm glad I did and I thank you for coming with me.  Some of our more awkward moments now make more sense. 

I would certainly argue that BLACK folks are at level 2 in Maslow's hierarchy from a collective perspective.

I don't know...we're certainly less secure than mainstream folks of equivalent status, but I think most Black folks are secure enough that they're reaching for level 3 now.

I'm going to respond to two things at a time here. First off, I think 'Bulworth' was one of the worst films of all time. And I say so here:
http://www.mdcbowen.org/cobb/archives/004743.html

Secondly, I find it ironic that self-described 'black' people would not feel that the very act of being black hasn't demonstrated that self-esteem has been achieved. In fact, if anything's wrong with the picture it is that a measure of boastful self-esteem has been established without handling material circumstances.

As far as I'm concerned the solution to level 4 has been achieved, though many still have not benefitted from the sound of the drum. The program of black politics seems to be an inversion of the pyramid. Know yourself and 'ourstory' and then go out and conquer.

In fact, if anything's wrong with the picture it is that a measure of boastful self-esteem has been established without handling material circumstances.

Which came first...the chicken or the egg? The egg or the chicken or the chicken or the egg?

As far as I'm concerned the solution to level 4 has been achieved, though many still have not benefitted from the sound of the drum.

Blowjobs, right?

"The program of black politics seems to be an inversion of the pyramid. Know yourself and 'ourstory' and then go out and conquer."

At the moment there doesn't seem to be a "program" of black politics, merely a set of issues that black folks generally respond to in diverse ways rather than in lockstep. The only thing African Americans seem to agree about consistently is their revulsion for Bush and the Dixiecrat, oops I mean Republican Party. Black Conservatives should take note at their next circle jerk.

Michael has become exceedingly adept at firing up that rhetorical strawblower;

I'm going to respond to two things at a time here. First off, I think 'Bulworth' was one of the worst films of all time. And I say so here: http://www.mdcbowen.org/cobb/archives/004743.html

Your loyally oppositional critic never suggested anywhere, ever, that you cared for the movie Bulworth. Instead, his annoying auditory hallucination in your conscience suggested that your hyper-assimilationist politics are "Bulworthian"

Bulworth got it overtly right. I believe Cobb's unstated motive is Bulworthian.

Maslow forgot about generative imperatives, and in so doing, he neglected THE prime mover. As go these generative *instincts* so also the contingent levels of the hierarchy of needs.

IMOHO - the entirety of the culture war is about seignurial primacy and privilege.., here's a working title proposal, Who's Ya Daddy?" Progressive Patriarchy in the Fin d'Siecle American Republic

Methinkst, however, that while Bulworth's ego/persona collapsed under the sway of jes grew {however poorly that was depicted}, your ego/persona is hardening under the sway of an anglo-patristic hegemony that is fundamentally and fatally flawed.

My point to you, in the clearest possible terms, is that you've bought into what I consider to be a thermodynamically and morally bankrupt cultural ethos. BTW - I don't criticize you, but I will relentlessly exercise the duppified ideology you've elected to espouse.

Look on the bright side magne, it's a "that which does not kill you, makes you stronger" game proposition. If you're right, you'll only become a more articulate spokesman for the anglo-patristic absolutism you espouse. If you're mistaken, I'll eventually succeed in exorcising the defective meme that's taken root in your headbrain.

"If you're mistaken, I'll eventually succeed in exorcising the defective meme that's taken root in your headbrain."

You can take a Negro-Saxon like Negrodamus out of the woodshed, cnulan, but it only means you'll have to open up another can of whipass on him in the backyard.

The N.O. Police needs to administer a beat down to Mayor Ray Nagin for allowing this insanity to go down on his watch.

The Republican millionaire switched to the Democratic Party to run for mayor in N.O., but apparently he held fast to his Republican "values."

I had a conversation with my wife about this. It occurred to me that if a triage decision was made about evacuation, the largest segment of folks remaining in the city would be young black men - who would be tasked with rebuilding the city. During the flood of 1927, the same thing happened. Plenty of wealthy white folks were able to flee an inundated Delta - and while they were concerned for their property, they were assured that the state would impose reconstruction labor on black folk.

What is beginning to emanate from this story - and the others about police corruption is the fact that New Orleans has a long, complicated, ugly history. Just as the water resulted in floating caskets, many secrets and white-washed tales have been brought to the surface for the world to see.

The Big Easy is not unique with respect to its dirty. I suppose what is/was unique was the complexion of the dirt - and the beat to which that dirt shifted. Great post O.