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.
The neighborhoods ruled by gangs selling drugs and using guns. I see it all the time in Kansas City. I also see black neighborhoods that don't have that culture.
I grew up in East Kansas City, the majority of people I knew had nothing to do with gangs and using guns and drugs. The vast majority. Oddly enough Independence, mostly white, was the face of drugs and violence when I was younger. Our black neighborhoods were not "ruled" by gangs and violence. This isn't the movies. As kids we were never afraid to play or be anywhere in the hood. We used to ride our bikes anywhere from like the 18th & Vine area all the way out to like Swope Park and 80th and 90th and Troost. No problems. Stop exaggerating. I grew up in Kansas City, MO. Born and raised. I lived in those neighborhoods you always claim were mega-violent. The majority of people involved in violence in black neighborhoods are doing dirt themselves. It's crip killing blood. It's drug dealer killing fiend. There are also some "normal crime", but stop exaggerating.
Hood rat culture does get called out. Chris Rock made fun of hood rats. You find deviants in every race. I really can't see much of a difference (other than crime rates) between Black criminals and criminals of other races. Criminals are criminals.
I do feel that some people aren't looking for Blacks to call out hood rats. I think it's more about "we want to hear Blacks be ashamed of themselves". I know there are issues with criminal in alot of Black communities. Granted, I live in a predominantly White suburb. Out here I see some deviance. Meth is big where I live. I do agree that the hood rat/criminal is held up as the face of the Black population.
What name do you give the white deviants where you live?
And why do you want to label another black person a hood rat when you don't want to be labeled as such. When certain people like those posting on this forum see you - a black man - they will call you a hoodrat too because you are black. Us denigrating our own people is just participating in racism against our own people. Everyone is a combination of good and bad. Plenty of people who grew up in bad neighborhoods or even were gang members or drug dealers themselves, can and have turned their lives around. They are people.
For me, I don't denigrate other blacks by calling them rats, not because I don't want blacks to be ashamed of themselves, but because it makes no sense to do so. When someone does something shameful, I expect them to ashamed and if they are not, I'll be honest in that in many instances, I'll shame them myself by asking them what their mother/father or grandmother/father would say about their behavior or actions. I don't agree with the name calling because I know that the names we call ourselves are ones that non-blacks will put on all of us and the naive amongst us will internalize those labels. Just like I don't call blacks n*ggas or n*gg*rs I don't call us hoodrats or any other denigrating label.
For many naive folks, a black person denigrating another black person gives them license to denigrate and disrespect us all. I would rather we respect each other and shame each other when necessary over behavior and/or actions on a personal level - not by generically labeling other people.
You can be Black, be from the city, and not be a hood rat. Hood rat is about degenerate behavior, equivalent of "rednecks" where I live.
Again, focus on the person and the behavior and stop the silly labels. IMO often when this sort of discussion comes up, you are the first one to speak on "hoodrats" when you have never lived in a majority black, urban "ghetto" environment so you don't know what you are talking about when you label people a certain way.
And again, just by being black you will be labeled as such. So it is silly for you to perpetuate that label of your own self.
I don't call poor whites "rednecks" either FWIW. I know a lot of poor whites who lived in cities and more rural environments. They are people and no one fits any specific stereotype 100%.
I grew up in East Kansas City, the majority of people I knew had nothing to do with gangs and using guns and drugs. The vast majority. Oddly enough Independence, mostly white, was the face of drugs and violence when I was younger. Our black neighborhoods were not "ruled" by gangs and violence. This isn't the movies. As kids we were never afraid to play or be anywhere in the hood. We used to ride our bikes anywhere from like the 18th & Vine area all the way out to like Swope Park and 80th and 90th and Troost. No problems. Stop exaggerating. I grew up in Kansas City, MO. Born and raised. I lived in those neighborhoods you always claim were mega-violent. The majority of people involved in violence in black neighborhoods are doing dirt themselves. It's crip killing blood. It's drug dealer killing fiend. There are also some "normal crime", but stop exaggerating.
Verty true on the bold/underline.
It is sad that people believe that everything they see in media and entertainment is reality when it is not.
Blacks will commit more crimes and engage in destructive behavior at a higher rate than other races with all things being equal. I'm simply pointing out that I believe there is a genetic factor to said behavior and described a story that is not all that uncommon as an example.
If you don't buy this, I would suggest looking it up. Yes, black children with adoptive parents of other races are still more likely to wind up in prison. You can choose to believe this is because of racism or you can choose to believe it's because of a genetic factor. I personally believe it's a little of both. I by no means dislike any man or women by the color of their skin, but I accept this to be true.
Is what it is (shrugs shoulders)
See, the problem with your theory on inheritance as playing a part is simply false based on the idea that blacks collectively are committing violent crimes en mass. It's a small percentage within AA's that commit a large percentage of violent crime--overall, most blacks aren't involved nor have they ever been involved in any degree of violent crime in their lives, so it can't be genetic on that fact alone.
Using your anecdotal evidence, we can then say that whites are genetically predisposed to violence if you simply look at history. Are whites more violent because of what the Soviet Union did to its people under Stalin? Are whites more genetically predisposed to violence based on the evidence of what the Nazis did? Are whites more genetically predisposed to violence because of their use of atomic warfare?
Now collectively most whites world wide weren't involved in these atrocities, but based on your logic, the minority who have is evidence enough to argue that whites are genetically predisposed to being more destructive. But somehow I get the feeling that your logic is a one way street.
Jews are white and could change their name, which many of them did and shun their religion, which many of them did.
Due to the above, they could gain access to education and economic situations that would improve the lives of their families.
Blacks were denied a decent education nationwide and even prevented from wealth building until really the late 1970s/early 1980s. There were outliers of course, but not many because there were local laws across the country that denied blacks opportunities to become home owners in particular.
IMO slavery was not the huge issue for blacks economically and educationally that many black people seem to believe it was/is. I am black also BTW, but I study a lot of history and I truly do believe that if Jim Crow-esque lack of opportunities had not been denied to blacks nationwide (this sort of discrimination was not limited to the southern US) then our demographic would be better off educationally and economically today.
In regards to education, as a demographic, since 1980 we are the most educated than we have ever been and incomes actually are rising as well. IMO we need to focus on building wealth today.
For me, it is odd knowing a lot about modern history - especially for the past 100 years, that anyone believes that we should be "equal" on various footings with whites (and Jews are white). So group in America except native Americans (and theirs was unique to them being indigenous persons) have endured the systematic oppression and institutionalized racism the same as blacks have experienced.
On crime in regards to the OP, I agree that there are few inner city communities that are similar to black inner city communities. This is the case because even when whites are impoverished, their ancestors did not endure the recent discrimination that blacks did in our grandparents and great grandparents (and some of us our parents) generations. So the situations would and never will be the same. This is why any conversation on crime for me is kind of silly for the racial focus. Will note though that I grew up with a lot of white people in the inner city and there are smaller cities that have a lot of poor whites who do engage in a lot of crime. However, many of them have different issues than blacks and so their criminal behavior varies from blacks in this regard.
This is stupid by the OP. There may be not many inner city communities, but there are rural areas that have the same problems. Lots of Indian reservations have the same problems as inner city black communities. They’re just not in urban areas.
I notice poverty, joblessness, drug abuse are usually always in places where there has some type of economic decline. The Midwest, large urban areas, the Rust Belt.
Classical Racist: N!66ers are inferior to the white man cause they got small brains. A = C.
Neo-Racist: I am not a racist. I don't believe that blacks are inferior, but every other reason (besides innate inferiority) given for why blacks perform and behave worse than whites I don't accept. A = B and B = C.
Can we stop trying to compare people that arrived in America not in shackles to blacks? Jews received reparations. Jews had a place, America, that they could go to and be away from their oppessors. Jews and Italians came to the US and joined whiteness. And if you want to bring up Italians, they were and still are the face of organized CRIME. But they were accepted into whiteness for the sake of numbers. People look at those Italian gangsters and mobsters like they were cool. Not like thugs. Many Europeans came to the U.S. after 1900, got on welfare, and became what we know now as the middle class. They told their kids and grandkids that they worked hard and bootstrapped, but really they were on welfare, got affordable loans for housing or land, and benefitted from many government socialist programs. All this stuff magically became bad once more blacks were allowed to benefit from it. And when blacks got on welfare, notice how all of a sudden they started requiring that no black men can live in a family household with black women.
I know that none of this matter to many of you because, with blacks you like to start history at 1970. Fine. But you're not going to play the "look at the Jews game". When you post just state that you're not looking at the full context of black American history. You're looking at snapshot just to attempt to make your argument look somewhat not bad.
Also...like I said before...when talking about crime yall say there's a black culture...when talking about cultural appropriation..."we all share culture...blacks don't have a culture...there's just American culture".
One thing i notice is every 25 or 50 years, the narrative towards blacks changes, but it’s still linked to the notion of black inferiority.
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.
