I take this report, along with the report from last summer from Princeton, which looked at  employment opportunites for white men with prison records compared to black men without prison records. The conclusion of the report was that white men with prison records were more likely to be hired by employers than similarly qualified black men, without similar incarceration records.

 For me, there is more something more sinister at work here, that is, virtually, genocidal in effect. 

So, other than mass out migration to Fantasy Island, because, knowing these folks will probably commit only funds for continued mass imprisonment for black men, it seems to me, so as to provide job opportunites for their kit and kin in the de-industrialized rural / surburban America, what is the solution? I mean mass suicide is not an option. Is it?

If you ask me, virtual genocide is occurring, but on a subtle basis. In this way, it will not generate the requisite moral outrage globally, but especially here.

I'm of the opinion that the emergence of China and India, to name two entities/events, is a portend of the balancing act of the  global dynamic of work and worthiness of a group to partiscipate in the marketplace as workers and not as commodities, as an example, Black men. In light of these circumstances, Social Dawinism has re-emerged in a more public manner to serve as a measure of worthiness or winowing for some. That emergence from the shadows of think tanks to dominate the policy ranks of government has been carried out in a quiet manner but effective manner, so as to medicate and or obfuscate the skeptics. In effect, the afflicted group "goes quietly into the night." Or other hand, one gets newspaper articles that offer no real solution, or generate the requisite commpassion to help ameliorate the problems of the afflicted group in the first place.

 Pretty damn scary, huh?

Hmm? Let me see if I can clarify my point more.

According to the "Convention on the prevention and Punishment of the crime of Genocide" in AQtricle 2 states " Genocide menas any of the following acts commited with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as :

a) killing members of the group;

b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Hmmmm?

c) deliberately inflicting CONDITIONS of life CALCULATED to bring about it's physical destreuction in whole or in part; Hmmm- Again.

d) imposing measures intended to PREVENT BIRTHS within the group;

e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

 Massive abortions / massive incarceration of the men / massive unemployment of the men / massively disfunctional public schools etc...................................

Okay, let's start with a link to the whole document you (accurately) quote.

I have an issue with including abortions in the mix as long as they are not compelled, but you know that. Beyond that, by strict definition it's not genocide because the intent seriously is not to destroy but to control.

As I say that though, I keep in mind the answer Lee Brown, ex-NYC police commissioner and ex-US Drug Czar, gave when asked if he thought there was an explicit plan to destroy Black boys. He said if there were such a plan it would look EXACTLY like what we're seeing now.

I included abortion because, in effect, they are compelled, to an extent. For example, if one makes life circumstances so unbearable so as to facilitate, or create the conditions, that would make one consider abortion as an alternative to having child that would probably face similar unbearable circumstances- and, as such, leads to an abortion, ultimately, qualiifes. Or when ones protays Black femaqle fecundity in uch a pathologic way so as to make it seem criminal for them to have children fall into that category for me.

And as to your point on the matter of control versus destroy, us, I think on this point all one has to do is look at the vital statistics and death rates. They clearly show by whatever measure one can come up with, a clear distinction between mere control of Black men, versus their outright destruction. Even, for example, in the allocation of health care resources, a line of inquiry will reflect a level of ill-intent to a degree in all spheres of care delivery. Therefore, for me its more than control matter.

if one makes life circumstances so unbearable so as to facilitate, or create the conditions, that would make one consider abortion as an alternative to having child that would probably face similar unbearable circumstances- and, as such, leads to an abortion, ultimately, qualiifes.

I don't mean to get into the abortion thing here, but I will point out that attacking abortion per se doesn't address this problem at all.

Therefore, for me its more than control matter.

To me it doesn't matter as much as the fact that the effect of events are just as deadly whether death is the intent or not. Looking at Darfur, I don't think declaring something genocide does all that much to motivate folks.

My argument is not an attack on abortion per se, my concern is with extent of abortion is practiced on Black women for whatever reason.So, to that end, for me, it elavates the issue to that of genocidal.

 And as far as Darfur is concerned, the genocide there has  racial component to it to a degree, but the point of the matter at hand is that it's all resource driven. As CN would put it 'Black Gold' - oil. Those poor folks are caught in a geopolitical battle whereby, metaphorically speaking, it's akin to two elephants fighting, and guess who gets most of the damage done to them or it? Now you layer on the islamic component of the government there, China, the French, and then you add to the mix the colonial legacy of BullShit borders. I mean it's a big effing mess. How do you render the problem solvable? Drive oil down by a 50% per barrel end the BS in the middle east  and see what happens!

My argument is not an attack on abortion per se,

Good.

Oh! As to the matter of addressing the problems that have genocidal implications, I'm certain I'm not the only one that can look at the data, and reality of how a lot of our brother exist and come to the conclusion that something sinister is at work. Have you ever heard a radio show that proclaims to represent our interest as community ever mention our predicament with content relevant to the genocidal declarations? What about national and local politicans. Any hearings? Anywhere? Nursing and Medical associations? Black Studies meetings or professors, other than Jefferies, that specifically link the maladies that afflict us in a genocidal context? Professional Civil Rights Gurus or Black newspapers? 

So if groups and folks won't do it, can we really expect  plain folks to make that connection?