Do Ethnic Minorities Want In, or Out? Integration is the Way to Go (employment, crime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think in 50 years, the problem will solve itself because the problem will be non-existent. With so much intermarrying (and to a lesser degree, adoption) between races and ancestries, I think it will be a rare family that only has children or grandchildren of what has been the predominant ancestry of that family for many centuries. I think it would be difficult to continue to be racist or bigoted against one's own grandchildren 50 years from now -- although I do know of some people (mostly elderly) who refuse to "accept" some grandchildren just because of their ancestry and/or skin color (which, imo, is shameful). However, I doubt that this will be the case two generations from now, thank goodness.
Until that time, though, I think we will continue to experience some major growing pains.
Sooner that that. It will largely happen when the last generation born and raised in racial apartheid is dead.
It's neither dishonest nor disingenuous to point out that those who choose to drop out of high school(~40% among black males) or fail to engage in family planning(~70% illegitimacy rate) are in fact burdened by their own poor decision-making. To suggest this is rare, given these numbers, reveals a level of naivete(or dishonesty) which I can only describe as staggering.
White people are not preventing minorities from showing up to school every day and applying themselves. Nor are they forcing minorities to impregnate their girlfriend(s) of two weeks.
In fact, whites have spent trillions of dollars supporting minorities and trying to assimilate them into the US, all to no avail. So, to the OP's question, it should be clear to everyone that minorities do NOT "want in".
Unfortunately, you don't understand that millions of Blacks and Latinos live in very different environments than what you outline. That's very convenient when you want separation, as you clearly do.
It's just the statisticians. They are trying to understand 320 million people by talking to fewer than a thousand. To define a representative sample population, they need to weight by many different variables. Race is just one of them. It won't hurt to answer the question. Promise.
Whose game is it that we're all playing here? Where is the ownership? Do you even recognize the problem underlying this entire thread?
Great question, and therein lies my point. When are minorities going to start taking ownership of their own decisions and the problems they create in their communities? Blaming whitey just isn't gonna cut it anymore. "We drop out because of unequal school funding". " We commit crime because we can't get a job; whites discriminate against us". "I'm 22, I have three illegitimate kids because my great-great-grandmother's uncle was a slave"... or whatever other reason liberals want to dream up for them. Their excuses are falling on deaf ears now.
It's neither dishonest nor disingenuous to point out that those who choose to drop out of high school(~40% among black males) or fail to engage in family planning(~70% illegitimacy rate) are in fact burdened by their own poor decision-making. To suggest this is rare, given these numbers, reveals a level of naivete(or dishonesty) which I can only describe as staggering.
White people are not preventing minorities from showing up to school every day and applying themselves. Nor are they forcing minorities to impregnate their girlfriend(s) of two weeks.
In fact, whites have spent trillions of dollars supporting minorities and trying to assimilate them into the US, all to no avail. So, to the OP's question, it should be clear to everyone that minorities do NOT "want in".
The fallacy in your thinking (although I'm not so sure you are really thinking this through) is that you assume that people can "choose" to do what they want to. You assume that people have total control over their lives. Maybe you don't realize that many people dropped out of high school during the Great Depression. Many people don't get great jobs. Many people end up in bad school systems. People end up divorced. Bad things happen and often it's not under the person's own control.
As a teacher I saw a lot of kids who couldn't live up to their capacity when it came to school work. Or kids who dropped out. Or kids who otherwise messed up their lives. But it usually was not their own CHOICE.
I saw plenty of kids who came from poor, single parent families, kids without enough to eat, kids who couldn't even afford shoes--and I taught in a all white town. These kids didn't turn out very well but you would say it was their CHOICE. Because of POOR DECISIONS.
I don't know what annoys me more, your blanket assumption that everyone has the same opportunities in life or your repetitive parroting of buzz terms like "poor choice" and "bad decisions." Looks like you are just assigning words and examples to fit your pre-determined bias.
It's neither dishonest nor disingenuous to point out that those who choose to drop out of high school(~40% among black males) or fail to engage in family planning(~70% illegitimacy rate) are in fact burdened by their own poor decision-making. To suggest this is rare, given these numbers, reveals a level of naivete(or dishonesty) which I can only describe as staggering.
White people are not preventing minorities from showing up to school every day and applying themselves. Nor are they forcing minorities to impregnate their girlfriend(s) of two weeks.
In fact, whites have spent trillions of dollars supporting minorities and trying to assimilate them into the US, all to no avail. So, to the OP's question, it should be clear to everyone that minorities do NOT "want in".
Unfortunately, you don't understand that millions of Blacks and Latinos live in very different environments than what you outline. That's very convenient when you want separation, as you clearly do.
The fallacy in your thinking (although I'm not so sure you are really thinking this through) is that you assume that people can "choose" to do what they want to. You assume that people have total control over their lives. Maybe you don't realize that many people dropped out of high school during the Great Depression. Many people don't get great jobs. Many people end up in bad school systems. People end up divorced. Bad things happen and often it's not under the person's own control.
Do people have a choice about impregnating another person when neither they nor the mother have the financial or emotional resources to raise the offspring? Is it someone elses choice that the offspring grow up feral?
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
As a teacher I saw a lot of kids who couldn't live up to their capacity when it came to school work. Or kids who dropped out. Or kids who otherwise messed up their lives. But it usually was not their own CHOICE.
Whose choice was it for the children to be born when the mother had no plan or intention to raise the kid? Could the kid not have been placed for adoption if the mother lacked any child-raising ability?
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
I saw plenty of kids who came from poor, single parent families, kids without enough to eat, kids who couldn't even afford shoes--and I taught in a all white town. These kids didn't turn out very well but you would say it was their CHOICE. Because of POOR DECISIONS.
Whose choice was it for the children to be born when the mother had no plan or intention to raise the kid? Could the kid not have been placed for adoption if the mother lacked any child-raising ability?
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
I don't know what annoys me more, your blanket assumption that everyone has the same opportunities in life or your repetitive parroting of buzz terms like "poor choice" and "bad decisions." Looks like you are just assigning words and examples to fit your pre-determined bias.
Do the underclass avail themselves of the opportunities that they have? Did this kid, discussed in this thread, 16 year old high school student boxes his teacher and this news article, Philadelphia student caught on camera in a violent fist-fight with his teacher | Daily Mail Online, have a choice: (a) about coming to class late; and/or (b) responding with extreme violence? As for poverty, during the Depression people sold apples on the street. They didn't have their children beat their teachers senseless. And as for mental health, the liberals are allergic to compulsory treatment and in some cases compulsory institutionalization. The issue of mental health is raised only in connection with enforcement. When people such as myself want people to be forced to accept the treatment they need we hear about dignity and self respect.
My point is that people with a liberal mind-bent block any solution other than allowing the dystopian status quo. That is why Trump unfortunately got elected.
Do people have a choice about impregnating another person when neither they nor the mother have the financial or emotional resources to raise the offspring? Is it someone elses choice that the offspring grow up feral?
Whose choice was it for the children to be born when the mother had no plan or intention to raise the kid? Could the kid not have been placed for adoption if the mother lacked any child-raising ability?
Whose choice was it for the children to be born when the mother had no plan or intention to raise the kid? Could the kid not have been placed for adoption if the mother lacked any child-raising ability?
Do the underclass avail themselves of the opportunities that they have? Did this kid, discussed in this thread, 16 year old high school student boxes his teacher and this news article, Philadelphia student caught on camera in a violent fist-fight with his teacher | Daily Mail Online, have a choice: (a) about coming to class late; and/or (b) responding with extreme violence? As for poverty, during the Depression people sold apples on the street. They didn't have their children beat their teachers senseless. And as for mental health, the liberals are allergic to compulsory treatment and in some cases compulsory institutionalization. The issue of mental health is raised only in connection with enforcement. When people such as myself want people to be forced to accept the treatment they need we hear about dignity and self respect.
My point is that people with a liberal mind-bent block any solution other than allowing the dystopian status quo. That is why Trump unfortunately got elected.
Where to start. There are lots of reasons people end up with too many kids--I can remember the Catholic religion opposing birth control, birth control can fail, sometimes when people feel hopeless, they have kids to fill the void, divorce is common and it usually leaves the mother on her own with kids to raise. Planned Parenthood may even be de-funded.
Of course just having loads of kids when you can't afford them/don't want to raise them isn't something I'm in favor of either. But it happens in all races and mostly happens in the lower class where people don't have much else to live for. Just their kids.
And as for mental health, the liberals are allergic to compulsory treatment and in some cases compulsory institutionalization. The issue of mental health is raised only in connection with enforcement. When people such as myself want people to be forced to accept the treatment they need we hear about dignity and self respect.
Blanket statements like this usually are not true. "The liberals are..." If you asked 1000 different "liberals" you would probably get 1000 different answers. As for mental illness treatment, it's a pretty complicated subject, don't you think? I guess some considerations would be whether the treatment is humane. Locking someone up in a mental institution and medicating them into oblivion isn't. How would you like it if someone (evil spouse/jealous co-worker/mean family member) framed you and made you look crazy and you were put into a mental institution as a result? It can be used in a manipulative manner. You could end up in there for life too. It can be difficult to prove that someone is or is not mentally ill.
If it's humane treatment in a group home, yes, I would agree they should be made to do it if a judge has said so, and mostly for drug offenses. I also think the drug dealers should be locked up for life--but that's just me. Maybe you want them to go free. Maybe you want drugs legalized--who knows what anyone else thinks.
These mental health issues stem from the rotten environment anyway. So the "treatment" should really be something that would intervene and prevent the rotten family situation/neighborhood/whatever it is in the first place. Since no one can figure out how to do that, not much ever happens. Throwing money at the problem doesn't fix anything.
I don't think we're addressing the topic anymore though. Do racial minorities want in or out? I think they want IN. I have no idea why anyone--a feminist, a member of a race, someone with gender issues, etc. would want to further self-select. And I don't know how this idea ever got started either. Let people IN and then just leave it at that--and that's what this liberal says, but don't generalize what ALL liberals think until you have asked ALL liberals.
The fallacy in your thinking (although I'm not so sure you are really thinking this through) is that you assume that people can "choose" to do what they want to. You assume that people have total control over their lives. Maybe you don't realize that many people dropped out of high school during the Great Depression. Many people don't get great jobs. Many people end up in bad school systems. People end up divorced. Bad things happen and often it's not under the person's own control.
Bad things happen to everyone; those things are not necessarily under our control. How we choose to respond, the choices we make going forward, are indeed within our control. That's the fallacy of your own thinking; you can't see the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
As a teacher I saw a lot of kids who couldn't live up to their capacity when it came to school work. Or kids who dropped out. Or kids who otherwise messed up their lives. But it usually was not their own CHOICE.
I saw plenty of kids who came from poor, single parent families, kids without enough to eat, kids who couldn't even afford shoes--and I taught in a all white town. These kids didn't turn out very well but you would say it was their CHOICE. Because of POOR DECISIONS.
You're right, I would say that. At some point, we all have decisions to make about how we lead our lives. We're talking about adults here, not 5-year-old children. And frankly, if you had a lot of kids who failed to live up to their capacity in their school work, I would surmise that you were a failure as a teacher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
I don't know what annoys me more, your blanket assumption that everyone has the same opportunities in life or your repetitive parroting of buzz terms like "poor choice" and "bad decisions." Looks like you are just assigning words and examples to fit your pre-determined bias.
At what point did I ever claim/assume that everyone has the same opportunities in life? I've not used these "buzz terms" you've mentioned at all, let alone repetitively, so I'm not sure who you're quoting. You have no idea what my background is. And yet you speak of annoying assumptions? Incredible.
I think that true integration was well on its way in the 70's, 80's and 90's. It took, I think, the extreme wake-up calls of events such as the Watts riot to make many whites see that "it [segregation and discrimination] has always been this way and that's just the way things are" was not right, not fair, and just downright hateful -- and that to persist in the idea of white superiority was just going to create more bad times for everyone. In other words, I think most (or at least many) whites started seeing integration as being in their own self-interest. Then, as many more racial and cultural minorities started making true inroads in careers and achieved economic success and proved themselves to be at least the equal of whites, many more whites abandoned their racist, bigoted attitudes.
But then it became apparent that many people (of ALL races, btw) were just not able and/or willing to do what was necessary to succeed in the way that many of those in the white upper and middle class world define success -- meaning, that they were not willing to forego immediate pleasure for long-range goals, to obey the laws, get an education, get a good job, kowtow to bosses, pay their bills without government help, etc. -- they found themselves still in poverty and still being discriminated against. So, now, I think it is possible that many people think it would be easier/better for them to create their own society and rules instead of integrating and assimilating into what is still the majority and traditional culture of doing what one is "supposed" to do. I think that now and for the past 20 years or so, there has been more prejudice and discrimination based on socioeconomic class than on the color of one's skin (with many very notable exceptions, of course). I think that most whites would much rather live next door to a black accountant than to a chronically unemployed, drug abusing, and violent white person, for example.
In short, I think most people, no matter what race or culture they are, would rather be around people who share the same general values, attitudes, and ethics. However, as a white person, I, of course, cannot speak for a non-white (or any other person). All of what I wrote is just my opinion, and I could definitely be wrong.
The kowtowing comes from the fact that our own leadership has sold us out to corporations, through complex laws and crony capitalism, employers now have significant leverage over employees which was not always the case. But that really has nothing to do with integration.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
