The irony of the New York Times� 1619 Project...

[lilpixieofterror]

This has also been my experience. I grew up poor in RI, raised in Central Falls and then Pawtucket. My neighborhood was extremely mixed from as young as I can remember. Whites, Blacks, Puerto Ricans, Syrians, and Portuguese all played in the same neighborhoods. I think at that age, especially, you just don't look at race unless you're taught to. My parents were extremely anti-racist, so I'm sure that helped. I didn't really see heavy racism, and people heavily segregated until I moved to a small township in the Midwest. Complete culture shock. School was like 95% white, full of jocks, farm kids, and the like.

The Midwest is also one of the whitest areas, in the country. Where over 75% of the population, is white.

[Adrift]

Very Midwest. But that's pretty much the point being made. Large regions of the USA -- most of it, in fact -- remain largely racially segregated and that segregation didn't just happen but was designed in many places. Rural sundown towns, suburban white flight, racist urban planning -- we have, for generations, built up segregation systems that often have to be consciously overcome in order to have integrated, inclusive neighborhoods.

--Sam

The city that that township was associated with certainly had a racist past, as it was a stronghold of a one of the more violent branches of the KKK, so there's no denying that there was segregation. One of the famous eating establishments in that city actually had a separate restroom for blacks back in the 50s on the outside of the building (the door is still there, but of course, most people today don't know its history) and there was a "no coloreds" rule for the local swimming hole/and bubblers in the same decade (again, something that the last few generations have no knowledge of, certainly not within the white community).

While I believe some of the segregation was planned, some of it seemed to simply happen naturally. A number of Housing and Urban Development Acts were intended to be a positive help to the poor and underprivileged, and it mostly backfired as it resulted in segregated slums and towers-in-the-park type neighborhoods. And it does appear to be the case that, while some neighborhoods can be blissfully integrated (like the neighborhoods I grew up in), some people truly do desire self-segregation. It's always been that way. Polish tend to live near other Poles, Germans near other Germans, Irish next to Irish, Italians next to Italians, Jews next to Jews, and Blacks next to Blacks. Dearborn likely has the largest Arab population outside of the Middle East, and Minneapolis and St. Paul have extremely large Somali populations. I'm not saying these are wrong or right. I'm saying they just are. And sometimes they're not planned, or if they are planned, they're not always planned with malice.

[Adrift]

Hmmm ... I was annoyed that response gave mm a way out of dealing with the main point of my post, and i was annoyed at how hard it is to get an honest response from so many. I was annoyed at myself for being so far unable to write my posts so that I don"t leave a back door open for someone to latch onto and thus obfuscate the main point.

But I hear what you are saying. And im sorry It seemed I was 'biting your head off'. In another context your conments would have been an intersting sidebar to what is generally regarded as a ground breaking episode of a groundbreaking show. Uhura's role, a smart savy black women in a high ranking position on the bridge, was no trivial matter in that period of american history. She literally became a role model for many women of color.

Thanks though for letting me know how that response felt to you. And Ill try as best I can to avoid that in the future.


Jim

Thank you. My intent wasn't to give MM "a way out." I have no doubt he's capable of making his own arguments. I'm just a bit of a Trek nerd is all (I mean, not a major one, I don't have any model phasers or anything...ok ok I did once build the Enterprise D, but that was in high school, and so probably (hopefully) doesn't count).

[Adrift]

The Midwest is also one of the whitest areas, in the country. Where over 75% of the population, is white.

Too white. I preferred city life on the East Coast.

[Sam]

The city that that township was associated with certainly had a racist past, as it was a stronghold of a one of the more violent branches of the KKK, so there's no denying that there was segregation. One of the famous eating establishments in that city actually had a separate restroom for blacks back in the 50s on the outside of the building (the door is still there, but of course, most people today don't know its history) and there was a "no coloreds" rule for the local swimming hole/and bubblers in the same decade (again, something that the last few generations have no knowledge of, certainly not within the white community).

While I believe some of the segregation was planned, some of it seemed to simply happen naturally. A number of Housing and Urban Development Acts were intended to be a positive help to the poor and underprivileged, and it mostly backfired as it resulted in segregated slums and towers-in-the-park type neighborhoods. And it does appear to be the case that, while some neighborhoods can be blissfully integrated (like the neighborhoods I grew up in), some people truly do desire self-segregation. It's always been that way. Polish tend to live near other Poles, Germans near other Germans, Irish next to Irish, Italians next to Italians, Jews next to Jews, and Blacks next to Blacks. Dearborn likely has the largest Arab population outside of the Middle East, and Minneapolis and St. Paul have extremely large Somali populations. I'm not saying these are wrong or right. I'm saying they just are. And sometimes they're not planned, or if they are planned, they're not always planned with malice.

A lot of segregation in the Midwest was planned. Redlining throughout the early and mid 20th century was rampant and often continued after the practice was explicitly banned. And racially segregating residential areas (suburbia through redlining and white flight, urban areas through redlining and public/private financing) made educational segregation much easier.

Social studies have looked at "self-selection" and found that they cannot account for the racial segregation we see, nor for the inequality in community wealth and value.

When you see those concentrations of recent immigrants, just as an aside, it's because most are 1st or 2nd generation refugees: USCIS tries to group refugees by ethnicity and home region when it can (Indianapolis has a high Burmese population, for example) because it helps refugees resettle successfully. It's often not a function of diaspora immigrants coming together from across the country as an intentional self-selection.

--Sam

[Sam]

It seems almost painful, at this point, but historian Kevin Kruse has a good essay about this planned racial segregation in the 1619 Project.

"What does a traffic jam in Atlanta have to do with segregation? Quite a lot." Kevin M. Kruse. NYT: 1619 Project. 2019.08.14

--Sam

[Mountain Man]

Interesting. I remembered you indicating you were ia good bit older than that in a previous post. But that is why i tossed in charlottesville - just in case I mixed you up with someone else - You certainly witnessed all of that, it was dicussed endlessly here, and only an idiot would try to claim the epithets shouted there were not racist or were being uttered by 'liberals'.

Jim

I never said it was only liberals.

[lilpixieofterror]

Too white. I preferred city life on the East Coast.

[lilpixieofterror]

A lot of segregation in the Midwest was planned. Redlining throughout the early and mid 20th century was rampant and often continued after the practice was explicitly banned. And racially segregating residential areas (suburbia through redlining and white flight, urban areas through redlining and public/private financing) made educational segregation much easier.

Social studies have looked at "self-selection" and found that they cannot account for the racial segregation we see, nor for the inequality in community wealth and value.

When you see those concentrations of recent immigrants, just as an aside, it's because most are 1st or 2nd generation refugees: USCIS tries to group refugees by ethnicity and home region when it can (Indianapolis has a high Burmese population, for example) because it helps refugees resettle successfully. It's often not a function of diaspora immigrants coming together from across the country as an intentional self-selection.

--Sam

[oxmixmudd]

I never said it was only liberals.

Honestly, the only evidence of racism I've seen in my lifetime is from liberals (and those who share their ideals) who are desperate to keep it alive.

Yes, you did.

If you expect your little "and those who share their ideals" to offer you a 'get out of jail free' card - think again.


Jim

[Adrift]

My brother was recently in California and was absolutely astonished by the homeless issues there. Really shocked my father who lived there back in the 60s and always talked about it as though it were paradise.

[oxmixmudd]

It's a shame you and others don't know enough about what was happening in the '50s and '60s to recognize what still remains of that time, to recognize the coded language of white supremacists and their ilk.

What is the motto from the holocaust: "Never forget". Why that motto? Because when what happened is forgotten, it allows it to happen again due to the ignorance of those that have forgotten. And it applies here as well.

But there is more. Much more.

No one can deny that there is an overall disadvantage to African Americans. The statistics don't lie. But you and MM and others are spending a lot of time trying to deny that disadvantage means anything at all about the overall historical legacy of slavery and racism, to deny there is still anything left to do to help remove that distinction. Some have gone so far as to imply that there is a basic moral failing in African Americans as a group - a CLASSIC RACIST MEME. Perhaps these can be relegated to your 'ignorance' of what has come before, let us hope that's all it is.

But it is NOT a trivial issue. This conversation - your part, seer's part, MM's part, could easily be leveraged as proof of the lingering racism in this country. Anyone that knows the racist language, anyone that was there when it was at it's peak and has seen it over time can recognize the elements. They are here on these pages in the words of those arguing against Sam and myself en masse.

So maybe you and seer and MM don't know you are engaging in blatantly racist thought because you are 'too young' to know what the ideas are you've picked up from your conservative outlets (outlets with known connections to racist thought and groups), but it is written all over your comments.

And before you trot out your 'see a racist under every bush' line (again borrowed from conservative pundits with know racist backgrounds or connections) - maybe, just maybe - you should get a little more familiar with the history of the subject, and the language of the hate groups, and how they manipulate people like you into adopting or warming up to their ways of thinking about these issues.

Although I was raised by parents that attempted to strongly reject racist ideas, I was brought up in part in that southern racist culture. I witnessed segregation. Had school mates and friends for whom the Civil War is never over. I had relatives that were, in fact, white nationalists, people deep into the conspiracy theories that are out there and that are regularly repeated on these pages.

I know what this stuff sounds like. I know what the language is. And whether you mean to or not, you'd fit in quite well into those groups. You'd get lots of amen's from them. Not one of them would take exception to the majority, if not the entirety, of what you ,MM, seer, even CP and SPARKO and Rogue have written in this thread.

And that is just the cold hard truth about it.



Jim

[seer]

But it is NOT a trivial issue. This conversation - your part, seer's part, MM's part, could easily be leveraged as proof of the lingering racism in this country. Anyone that knows the racist language, anyone that was there when it was at it's peak and has seen it over time can recognize the elements. They are here on these pages in the words of those arguing against Sam and myself en masse.

So maybe you and seer and MM don't know you are engaging in blatantly racist thought because you are 'too young' to know what the ideas are you've picked up from your conservative outlets (outlets with known connections to racist thought and groups), but it is written all over your comments.


Jim

Jim, I'm 66 years old and lived through the whole Civil Rights thing. My aunt Barbra was a personal friend of the Schwerner family, and hosted them in her home for a local town hall when Michael was still missing. And that had an effect on me as a 10 year old. So I would like you to specify where I was blatantly racist, if not apologize.

[oxmixmudd]

The Midwest is also one of the whitest areas, in the country. Where over 75% of the population, is white.

In the southwest (which included colorado and surrounding states) during the time when black/white racism was rampant in other parts of the country, the racist element there involved Mexicans, lingering from the mid 1800's.

Source: wikipedia

The lynching of Mexicans and Mexican Americans in the Southwest has long been overlooked in American history. This may be due to the fact that most historical records categorized Mexicans, Italians, Native Americans, and sometimes Chinese lynching victims as white.[6] It is estimated that at least 597 Mexican Americans were lynched between 1848 and 1928. Mexicans were lynched at a rate of 27.4 per 100,000 of population between 1880 and 1930. This statistic is second only to that of the African American community during that period, which suffered an average of 37.1 per 100,000 population.[3

© Copyright Original Source

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

Jim, I'm 66 years old and lived through the whole Civil Rights thing. My aunt Barbra was a person friend of the Schwerner family, and hosted them in her home for a local town hall when Michael was still missing. And that had an effect on me as a 10 year old. So I would like you to specify where I was blatantly racist, if not apologize.

this is the quote I was thinking of when I wrote my comment seer:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...988#post665988

What causes 70% of black men in the inner cities to abandon their children, when back in the day, when overt racism was much worse, only 20% did?

and I noted it in my reply at the time:

But your question has very, very dark and racist implications. Go back to my fundamental test question. If blacks and whites are fundamentally equal at birth, then these differences come from cultural and environmental differences, differences that are not hard to show find their primary source in racism and slavery over centuries. And it is the moral responsibility of those not 'enslaved' by those environmental differences to try to 'set free' those that are.

The problem was not as much asking the question but rather it's context - a context that is defending overall that the lingering disparity we see between African American communities and White communities is 'their own fault'.

I know my comment will be hard to take. Perhaps you could go back through this thread and note the percentage of statements a white supremacist would 'Amen' vs the percentage of statements such a person would reject per person. If you do that, I think you might begin to see what I'm seeing.

Jim