5 ms·

If by 'meaner to each other' consider that after said policies were introduced IN THE 1960's, the amount of crime and violence increased massively in all groups

by jariel 6y ago

If by 'meaner to each other' consider that after said policies were introduced IN THE 1960's, the amount of crime and violence increased massively in all groups, but most poignantly among African Americans wherein the murder rate today is considerably higher than back in the 'nice days' (peaking in 1992). Everyone talks about 'rights' in the 1960's while at the same time there was a massive upheaval in crime. Imagine if you lived in a plain, boring world, and then protests started to happen, and all rates of measured crime went up by 300-800% in your neighbourhood. Having the basis of comparison to know 'what it felt like before' you might be inclined to think the world is in disarray. Imagine if you remembered a time when many inner cities were not 'no go zones' full of extreme crime and poverty - and that those were just 'normal' neighbourhoods, imagine seeing that precipitous decline in real time. It'd be hard not to recognize that 'something' was wrong.

dbcurtis 6y ago
Drug use amd drug-related crime also increased during the 60’s. That is a confounding factor in the crime argument.
- an_opabinia 6y ago
  That and wars happening at the same time and also in the near past that uh, also killed a lot of people. It’s not really the same thing, but US and European governments have lawfully sent more of their own innocent citizens to the grave in this century than any criminals ever. Then again the commenter was trying to equivocate opposition to civil rights as a law and order issue.
- burner831234 6y ago
  And ^^ the government was aware and enabling this increase in drugs/drug-related crime to disrupt political movements for, specifically equality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO#:~:text=COINTELPRO%20(syllabic%20abbreviation%20derived%20from,and%20disrupting%20American%20political%20organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO#:~:text=COINTELPRO%... https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3jedcYsLL_IJ:https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1997-01-05-1997005031-story.html+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3jedcY... (cached for the ease/convenience)
- jariel 6y ago
  Of course, there are many confounding factors - I'm not hinting otherwise. What I am pointing out - is the near total social decay that broke out in many areas, and the otherwise obvious malaise introduced in many places throughout America that for some reason, people want to totally ignore over when it suits their agenda. There's a generational divide between people who actually remember what Manhattan was like before it was 'cleaned up' (by hook or by crook, even that is controversial).
- coldelectrons 6y ago
  Don't forget lead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%E2%80%93crime_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%E2%80%93crime_hypothesis History has _a lot_ of moving parts.
bsanr2 6y ago
Crime increased partly because we massively expanded both the definition of crime and the powers necessary to find and prosecute it. There is a role for the breakdown of community in this, of course, but, surprise, that was a product of institutionalized racism and bigotry also. Scholarship at the time attributed it to a spontaneous breakdown of the (black) family, without mentioning how the botched implementation of integration, the moral and structural blight of "urban renewal," the canary song of the exodus of middle class manufacturing jobs, and the ever-present threat of a government crackdown on your efforts to be self-sufficient contributed to an atmosphere of hopelessness (which apparently only matters to politicians and public servants when you're hopped up on Vicodin in your double-wide) in which organized crime, and the unorganized crime that generally follows, becomes a valid option. Black America didn't happen in a vacuum.
- onecommentman 6y ago
  At humongous reputational risk, may I ask “so how did the Asians do it”? I acknowledge all of the well-articulated points you made about Black culture and challenges. But FOB and first-gen Asians had to work with racism (with obvious visual cues), and little/no social capital, and a radical break with native culture, and a non-Indo-European native language to boot. Was the very strong attitude against drugs and tiger moms the cause? Would an opium war and water buffalo moms help? Did the homeland of Asia itself provide support that Africa either was too long ago or too poor/screwed up to provide. (Before you bring up colonialism, remember the Asian experience.) I have no dog in this fight, just curious...
  - complexworld 6y ago
    For many Asians being FOB was an advantage. They had not been subjected to centuries of discrimination. I believe that immigrants coming from Africa do better in the US, on average, because they usually come from the educated elite of their home country. The opposite occurs for some Asians minorites who were poor and uneducated in their home countries, they don't do anywhere near as well as the Asians who come from a privileged background. Does that answer your question?

by jariel 6y ago

dbcurtis 6y ago

Drug use amd drug-related crime also increased during the 60’s. That is a confounding factor in the crime argument.

an_opabinia 6y ago
That and wars happening at the same time and also in the near past that uh, also killed a lot of people. It’s not really the same thing, but US and European governments have lawfully sent more of their own innocent citizens to the grave in this century than any criminals ever. Then again the commenter was trying to equivocate opposition to civil rights as a law and order issue.
burner831234 6y ago
And ^^ the government was aware and enabling this increase in drugs/drug-related crime to disrupt political movements for, specifically equality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO#:~:text=COINTELPRO%20(syllabic%20abbreviation%20derived%20from,and%20disrupting%20American%20political%20organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO#:~:text=COINTELPRO%... https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3jedcYsLL_IJ:https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1997-01-05-1997005031-story.html+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3jedcY... (cached for the ease/convenience)
jariel 6y ago
Of course, there are many confounding factors - I'm not hinting otherwise. What I am pointing out - is the near total social decay that broke out in many areas, and the otherwise obvious malaise introduced in many places throughout America that for some reason, people want to totally ignore over when it suits their agenda. There's a generational divide between people who actually remember what Manhattan was like before it was 'cleaned up' (by hook or by crook, even that is controversial).
coldelectrons 6y ago
Don't forget lead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%E2%80%93crime_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%E2%80%93crime_hypothesis History has _a lot_ of moving parts.

bsanr2 6y ago

Crime increased partly because we massively expanded both the definition of crime and the powers necessary to find and prosecute it. There is a role for the breakdown of community in this, of course, but, surprise, that was a product of institutionalized racism and bigotry also. Scholarship at the time attributed it to a spontaneous breakdown of the (black) family, without mentioning how the botched implementation of integration, the moral and structural blight of "urban renewal," the canary song of the exodus of middle class manufacturing jobs, and the ever-present threat of a government crackdown on your efforts to be self-sufficient contributed to an atmosphere of hopelessness (which apparently only matters to politicians and public servants when you're hopped up on Vicodin in your double-wide) in which organized crime, and the unorganized crime that generally follows, becomes a valid option. Black America didn't happen in a vacuum.

onecommentman 6y ago
At humongous reputational risk, may I ask “so how did the Asians do it”? I acknowledge all of the well-articulated points you made about Black culture and challenges. But FOB and first-gen Asians had to work with racism (with obvious visual cues), and little/no social capital, and a radical break with native culture, and a non-Indo-European native language to boot. Was the very strong attitude against drugs and tiger moms the cause? Would an opium war and water buffalo moms help? Did the homeland of Asia itself provide support that Africa either was too long ago or too poor/screwed up to provide. (Before you bring up colonialism, remember the Asian experience.) I have no dog in this fight, just curious...
- complexworld 6y ago
  For many Asians being FOB was an advantage. They had not been subjected to centuries of discrimination. I believe that immigrants coming from Africa do better in the US, on average, because they usually come from the educated elite of their home country. The opposite occurs for some Asians minorites who were poor and uneducated in their home countries, they don't do anywhere near as well as the Asians who come from a privileged background. Does that answer your question?