Was Integration Bad?

Again, I will say that some of what she said makes sense and I understand it. When I think of duty, I think about doing those things that will make sure ALL black children have a chance to live a life full of real opportunities and the chance to be and do and go as far as their minds will take them.
There are real issues in the black community and we will never get those issue resolved if we keep fighting against each other.

Does duty mean “stick with your own kind”? No. Not to me. But it will to some.

There needs to be some measure of respect between us all. Black men and black women.

I can respect anyone who has respect for themselves and respect for me as well.

I want to see black people free to go has far as their minds will take them but it will never happen without respect.
Respect for ourselves and whatever choices we make.
Respect enough to know that people in pain will lash out.
Respect enough to agree to disagree without it turning into a tit for tat way of life.

 

After finally reading through the rest of this woman's rant, all I can say for now is this: If Hilter was reincarnated as a black woman, then we all would know who he/she is.

 

Sardonic, I see you're carrying on the tradition of posting great comments.

The one below was your finest in this thread.

 

Tmass,

in the short time that you've been posting on the boards, your wisdom has made an impact that has been greatly appreciated. Keep it coming.

When are some people going to learn that personal responsibility is the key to empowerment and success.

Why waste your mind snapping someone out of their fantasy when they seem so happy in drowning in their ignorance? I could better use my time thinking of a million and one ways to better use my time.

I think she's a cherrypicker who wants the cream of the crop, even if she's queen of the crap herself.

Priceless!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Booyah!!! Game, set, match goes to Tmass!

 

Flipmode,
I think this was directed towards my comment. White nationalist and seperatist often quote the "14 Words" of self proclaimed supremacist David Lane, "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children."

These 14 Words that are the cornerstone of white separatism allude to the fact that white people have a responsibility to refrain from race mixing for the protection of the white race. Is it social responsibility or is it racism?

I feel that it is racism to proclaim that protecting your race by refusing or better yet, prohibiting inter-race relations. The idea that it is my social resonsibility to have black childeren supports my argument because it is still a form of racism. Regardless of who says it or the motivation behind the words, looking down on someone because he or she is open-minded is ignorant. Plain and simple.

Genuine - Thanks for the Kudos!

 

Silvercosma

Do you mind explaining why you believe that the black person who believes that he or she is responsible for marrying another black person is the same as a white person who believes that he or she is responsible for whites?

Do you think there is a difference?
And if so, why do you think so and what are the differences in your opinion?
In general, I think that there is a difference (of course there are exceptions). I would say this is the case because of history, social reality, and white privilege.

Let’s say Eric (black gentlemen) brings his girlfriend, Beth (white lady) to meet his family. Eric’s family are opposed to the relationship because they believe that “responsible black men” should date or marry black women. Some family members wonder: What message is Eric “really” saying about black women through in his choice of mate? Beth’s family meets Eric. Beth’s family is opposed to the relationship they believe that relationships and marriage are difficult enough without having to deal with the interracial matter. Furthermore, worry that Beth’s choice of mate will make her life more difficult. They figure: Why bother?

Are the families reactions or beliefs racists? Are they “equally racists” in their response to the relationship?

I would say probably not-their reactions are not the same or equal.

On the surface it would appear that Eric’s family’s reaction is the harshest because it appears that they are pushing the idea of racial loyalty and “duty.” While Beth’s family are mostly concern with how the relationship will make her life more difficult.

However there are other “things” to consider. Part of Eric’s socialization was an awareness of his group status a black persona and specifically as a black male. This socialization was based on certain physical characteristics - skin complexion, broad nose, full lips, etc. Eric’s socialization was also based on the fact that group awareness historically facilitated social and political power-and mere survival for the group. The socialization also prepared Eric for the social reality of racism and white privilege. How have black Americans historically dealt a power blow to racism and white privilege? They have used their group power. Eric’s family reason that one of the most powerful statement black people make are to love, marry, and “make babies for the revolution” (I’m joking here). But the foundation of black life-and black resistance-and black survival has been the black family. Eric’s choice in a mate, seems to be in direct contradiction to his socialization.

Beth’s socialization may have little emphasis on group awareness. Granted, she may have been socialized to appreciate her ethnic heritage-but for the most part she was just Beth who happened to be white. Why would Beth family expressively socialization regarding a group status? To combat racism? To survive? Beth is privileged here. First, she doesn’t receive direct group socialization in part largely because it wasn’t necessary for her social and political identity. Yet, she is grouped or is part of a group who are privilege that no claim group status but enjoys many privileges. At the same time, she has the privilege of once again not being a part of group (therefore having more individuality) but she reaps the benefits of being part of the “one up group.”

It’s similar like the 6 black co-workers who sit together at work being accused of being separatists while 20 white co-workers sit together and receive no accusations. One group is penned separatists and not wanting to be apart while the other group isn’t really observed as the group?

Eric and Beth may or may not continue with their relationship or marry but there group history, social realities, and privileges differ. Eric may decide that to pick and choose parts of his socialization that are most important or feasible with his individual wants and needs. If he is mature he will do so.

Black American’s emphasis on responsibility to group status and a sense of duty was based on history, survival, as well as strategy to build social and political power. This does not mirror white’s resistance to interracial relationships. To ignore this fact would involve ignoring the social realities and white privilege. This doesn’t mean that a group status doesn’t come with problems and conflicts namely people are individuals. In 2006 it’s more of an individual decision whether a black person’s adheres to “supposed group rules,” and it’s more of an individual decision to determine (pick and choose) what group identities that he or she find in keeping with their life.

I know this was really long "winded."

 

Tmass

Actually, my inital post was directed to LaydeezmanCris.

 

I think flipmode may be onto something here.

 

Flipmode,
Very elegant and elequoent response. I have only one problem...

Your response is based on hypotheticals. I agree that those hypotheticals are factually based but they are hypotheticals indeed. The idea of socialism and identity as a justification for racism and bigotry is wrong in my opinion. I agree that Eric and Beth's families have two very different motivations for keeping these two apart but the fear of Beth having a more difficult life is the only reason that appears admirable. If Beth's family is genuinely concerned about their daughter then, as we all know, they have good cause to object the inter-racial union. As a parent, I will do everything in my power to protect my son.
However, Eric's family bestowing some social responsibility on their son's shoulders because of the way things once were is harsh, cruel and the epitome of bigotry. I believe in knowing where we come from but that doesn't mean we have to stay there. As long as we perpetuate the fear-laden thinking of our ancestors we will have no progress.

The arguments are the same. The white separatist who wants to keep his race pure is the same as the black separatist who feels a sense of responsibility to every black person on the earth. Both groups want separation and for the same reason - race. I argued this point with a devout and self-proclaimed racist the other day....

Besides the fact that you were born white/black, what other reason do you have for being superior?

In other words, to pledge allegiance to a skin color or ethnic background is foolish. You can't control it. You can't even change it. I compare it to the person who roots for the Univeristy of Texas because they CHOSE to go to the school and the die-hard fan who just happened to be born in Texas. Both have the right to cheer their team, but I truly feel the person who made a concious effort to belong to the team is more deserving.

Please don't get me wrong. I loved your post. It was well written and very well presented. I will agree to disagree with you. I make no attempt to change your mind, nor do I concede to your point. It's refreshing to exchange ideas with other thinkers. Have a great weekend.

 

Wow! The responses were very interesting but . . .

Since I kept seeing this site as a referral to my www.BlackWomenNeedLoveToo.com site, I decided to check out what you all were discussing about my article. First I'd like to clear up a few of your over negative predictions of who I am.

I have a very wonderful man who loves, honors and cherishes me. He is a Black man who once dated many White women. He no longer does because he's with me.

He is not rich nor does he drive a fancy car.

I'm not so shallow to judge all my reasons based solely on skin color and hair texture.

I do believe that Black women should date whatever type of man they can find because the problem with the Black community is the lack of positive Black male participation and Black male abandonment. Therefore any type of man, who can provide and protect the community is O.K. with me.

I'm an activist who has chosen to dedicate my life to the upward mobility of Black people and that would also include your bi-racial children.

I do realize that no one can please all the people all the time, but I'm trying to get more Black men to be responsible.

Black men with non-Black women is a serious issue but is not the only issue that is hurting the Black community.

The breakdown of the family is our biggest issue because we have a weak foundation and ask any architect, without a strong foundation every single structure will fall.

Also, there were some really smart and open minded men here who took some responsibility for the real and the true. There was only one idiot in the bunch who took it personally instead of thinking it through and labeled me Hitler--come on, did your White girlfriend use that line and you bought that ignorant parallel.

All that I'm saying guys is that we, as a race, are failing miserably and we NEED you more than we ever did before. You are a different man than in the slave days, you do have power to make positive change for yourself and your off springs.

One pathetic comment was this one Black guy was pleading to White women by saying how wonderful he would treat his woman. Doesn't he think Black women want that too? We are girls too!

I think too many Black men who date outside the race do have some serious issues with their Blackness and are trying to run as fast and as far as they can from their responsibility and the stereotype. If he could turn his skin white he would.

The biggest problem with the Black race is the irresponsible Black male. I'm sorry guys but that is the truth. Black single mothers, too many fatherless homes, too many incarcerated, too many uneducated, etc.

How can the few good ones that are Black abandon the Black community. You are slapping MLK and Malcolm X in the face when you don't live up to the idea of the dream that they died for, which is equality, and not just Black and White people playing together, but really and truly living equally.

Equality will never be obtained as long as the racial divide based on income, status, and class are segregated by race. To make an equal society, we need to concentrate on ourselves first and then when that is achieved, then date who the hell ever you want to.

Racism is unnatural. It was made up by White people. But the responsibility to fix the matter lies in the hands of each one of us.

One Black man once told me that our problem is that we are in love with our enemy. Could that be true??

Black men we need you! It's just that simple.

Much love to you my brothas,

Pearl Jr.
www.BlackWomenNeedLoveToo.com

I'm not just an author--I'm an activist!

 

Re: Silvercosma

While I understand the cultural aspect you described in your post, you commit the logical fallacy to define both families based on their current situation, eventhough beliefs and ideologies aren't defined based on current situations but on their goals and values, and therefore the current situation of a group doesn't has any effect on how they're referred to. The goals, values and the belief in a racial dichotomy are the same in both families, the only difference is that they are approaching them from different ends of the spectrum.

Also, it doesn't matter which group already has power since both are about obtaining power, advantage and comfort for their own "race" and any individual, group, organization or nation that sets its own agenda over that of another based on the idea of race and is advocating racial segregation is also advocating racism and racial descrimination - and, no matter how much people like to tip-toe around it, that's racist, no matter who does it or how justified they think they may be.

 

Silvercosma

Admitting there are a number of fallacies that could be made when examining Eric’s and Beth’s family’s positions. I am not sure I understand the point that you are making in the latter part of your first sentence. Beliefs and ideologies aren’t defined based on current situations but on their goals and values. Are you referring to Eric’s and Beth’s personal or individual beliefs and ideologies or are you referring to their group’s beliefs and ideologies? The statement : The current situation of a group doesn’t have any effect on how they’re referred to. Who are the they at end of the sentence Eric and Beth or american blacks and whites?

I would say that the beliefs and ideologies of a group or individual is based on history, family or community of origin, and their on going social reality (social reality includes many factors one example experience).

Yes the goals and values of Beth’s and Eric’s families are probably similar work -work hard, being responsible, etc. These are generally pegged as american values or beliefs. The most significant difference as it pertains to their group status is the differences in their social reality, history, and experience. I dare not suggest that these differences outweigh the commitment or love that Eric and Beth may have to one another. I am saying that they exists. The burden is really on Eric because has probably been socialized more so that Beth (unless she had a significant ethnic socialization) to be conscious of his group identity. The person from the “one down group” is the individual that has to learn to balance his or her personal identity with his or her group identity-we (black Americans) have always done this consciously or unconsciously. This is why I refuse to buy the theory that interracial relationship are more difficult for the white partner (it can happen given the reality of america today it is unlikely). Unless, Beth has had long term relationships with blacks or has done some type of anti-racism work she could live out the majority of her life without having to be aware of her group identity

I want to make sure that I understand the point that you are making. You have very long sentences! Any individual, group, organization, or nation that set its own agenda that of another based on the idea of race…….

So, Eric’s decision to join the black law association instead of the “white” law association is racist? Eric’s decision to join a predominately black fraternity is racist? Eric’s decision to attend a historically black university instead of a “majority” university is racist? And all of the other actins or reactions blacks have made in more often than not in response to be “uninvited” from majority organization and institutions are racists This would be same as the laws that white created in america to make interracial marriages illegal? That would be the same as whites making it difficult for blacks to join majority organizations and have access to power in majority organizations. On a social level this would mean that the both the person who refuses to date another person based on (intra racial) are no different than the person who dates another person based on or because race (interracial)? I don't believe that Eric's or Beth's families reactions are racists.

Thanks for the exchange we can agreed to disagree respectively! [/quote]

 

Re: Silvercosma

Excellent post but I had to thank you for highlighting this point.

 

This PearlJr has the nerve to insult me by calling me an idiot, while at the same time, come in here just to write more of all of that Hitler-style crap about being an 'activist' on an Interracial site like this one. Now, who's the idiot? :roll:

 

Getting back to flipmode's thesis, I still think that the comparisons or ideals of 'racial identity' between blacks and whites in America can't be closely compared either, since they don't both necessarily meet the SAME EXACT purpose of 'racial identity.'

 

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

Race identity is a crutch. It teaches individuals that if you possess absolutely no character traits that make you unique...there's always your skin color. The method behind seperation does not justify the act.
2 Lincolns.

 

But what if the lesser evil isn't necessarily promoting the ideals of a "purer racial identity", and instead, try to advocate more self-awareness of an "impurer racial identity" proposed by the greater of the 2 evils?