5 ms·

Blaming black culture for the continuation of black struggles is incorrect because it reverses the causality. Assuming by "detrimental aspects of Black culture"

Blaming black culture for the continuation of black struggles is incorrect because it reverses the causality. Assuming by "detrimental aspects of Black culture" you mean the usual conservative talking points of gangs, rap, drugs etc - these things are driven by poverty, not the other way around. Eastern Europe is home to many of these afflictions for reasons of poverty as well; same with "chav" culture in the UK - and both of these cultural groups are white. The point of origin of these issues is the ghettoisation of black people by redlining combined with the relative lack of wealth caused by slavery and subsequent discrimination; when you're stuck areas of little economic opportunity, gangs, impulsivity, violence and drug addiction are inevitable regardless of who is the victim. You can't really bootstrap a healthy economy from within a poor one. To prove my point, look at Detroit - when it was a hub of car manufacturing (ie, healthy industry) it was a hub of economic productivity. When all the jobs left it collapsed. It was a majority-black city at both of these points; poverty was the only difference. Thus, the people in this cycle can be said to be oppressed by their circumstances (not, importantly, other people); the systemic approach would be to try to lift these people out of poverty through policy-based interventions in order to liberate them from their dire circumstances. The catchphrase of critical theory is that the aim is "liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them". It is both coherent and a useful and pragmatic political approach to helping people get out of oppressive circumstances.

zozbot234 5y ago
> Blaming black culture for the continuation of black struggles is incorrect because it reverses the causality. Causal feedbacks are a thing, too - though admittedly, they might be hard to tease out via a purely "historical" analysis. Ultimately, one wants to look at purely exogenous "forcings" when faced with potential feedbacks. Teaching the fundamentals behind the bourgeois ethic in schools and via public awareness raising might be a good "exogenous" intervention that would mitigate this particular problematic feedback. The prevailing orientation these days among self-described 'progressive' elites is just the opposite: successful values are portrayed as the mere reflection of "Whiteness", and implicitly, the converse attitudes are praised as authentic. Can we really expect this to be a positive development? Is this really what passes for "a useful and pragmatic political approach to helping people get out of oppressive circumstances" in modern academia? (Of course, this is not to say that interventions on the "overall circumstances" side of the equation might not also be successful! For example income transfers to the poor, when accompanied by good surrounding incentives, have sometimes worked very well to bootstrap sustained growth. The recent childcare-focused tax subsidies seem to be exploring this direction.)
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  Of course there are self-reinforcing feedback loops - that's the sad nature of poverty traps. Once you get into poverty it's extremely difficult to climb back out, that's the issue I was describing - and to consistently get people out of poverty, external interventions are required (which not only benefits them, but society at large as poverty tends to make people economically unproductive and causes other social diseases like addiction and crime that affect the general public). I think the discourse around "Whiteness" is poisoned by liberals who can't understand systemic analysis and thus project critical theories into the space of the individual. I share your frustration with this - Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo are extremely counterproductive and barely understand the topics they have made careers out of. That's what happens when progressive ideas get sold to corporations by management consultants - and much of the liberal interpretation of these ideas comes from these same types of sources.

zozbot234 5y ago

> Blaming black culture for the continuation of black struggles is incorrect because it reverses the causality. Causal feedbacks are a thing, too - though admittedly, they might be hard to tease out via a purely "historical" analysis. Ultimately, one wants to look at purely exogenous "forcings" when faced with potential feedbacks. Teaching the fundamentals behind the bourgeois ethic in schools and via public awareness raising might be a good "exogenous" intervention that would mitigate this particular problematic feedback. The prevailing orientation these days among self-described 'progressive' elites is just the opposite: successful values are portrayed as the mere reflection of "Whiteness", and implicitly, the converse attitudes are praised as authentic. Can we really expect this to be a positive development? Is this really what passes for "a useful and pragmatic political approach to helping people get out of oppressive circumstances" in modern academia? (Of course, this is not to say that interventions on the "overall circumstances" side of the equation might not also be successful! For example income transfers to the poor, when accompanied by good surrounding incentives, have sometimes worked very well to bootstrap sustained growth. The recent childcare-focused tax subsidies seem to be exploring this direction.)

beaconstudios 5y ago
Of course there are self-reinforcing feedback loops - that's the sad nature of poverty traps. Once you get into poverty it's extremely difficult to climb back out, that's the issue I was describing - and to consistently get people out of poverty, external interventions are required (which not only benefits them, but society at large as poverty tends to make people economically unproductive and causes other social diseases like addiction and crime that affect the general public). I think the discourse around "Whiteness" is poisoned by liberals who can't understand systemic analysis and thus project critical theories into the space of the individual. I share your frustration with this - Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo are extremely counterproductive and barely understand the topics they have made careers out of. That's what happens when progressive ideas get sold to corporations by management consultants - and much of the liberal interpretation of these ideas comes from these same types of sources.