Why are all black people expected to be responsible for the "black community?" (generations, Israel)

[bigjretrac]

Originally Posted by katygirl68

I will say that there are certain things the black community can do to alleviate crime, but doesn't seem to happen because they don't trust the police or are afraid of retaliation (with good reasons for both). When someone in your area gets killed and you probably know who the killer is but won't tell the police, then what's to stop that guy or gang from continuing to terrorize the neighborhood? If some drug dealer is out on the street corner, make an anonymous call to the police. Or even get a group of people together to take back the neighborhood from the young thugs. I saw exactly that happen in the early '90s when a group of older residents of a neighborhood started filming drug deals and prostitutes getting in cars, making sure to get the faces on film of the drug dealers and buyers, prostitutes and johns. They would turn the films over to the police and eventually those thugs and prostitutes moved on to another area and left their area alone.

It's not easy, but it's not impossible either. You just have to start working with the police more to keep that element out of the neighborhoods.

In a perfect utopia, this would happen. Unfortunately, that's just not the case in the US.

1) Fear of retaliation: Imagine already not living in a great neighborhood and now worrying that the criminal has it out for you? How many times do these jokers get out of prison and their first order of business is looking for the person THEY THINK snitched? How many times have the criminal's buddies gone out looking for the snitch?

When I was in elementary school, we had some friends who abruptly moved from the city out to the suburbs. It was a planned move, but it wasn't supposed to happen for another couple of years. The reason? The mom spoke to the cops and began to get threats.

2) Distrust of the police: Unfortunately, cops have a very strained relationship with inner city black neighborhoods. Oftentimes they're slow to react, and in NYC, have often been accused of using excessive force. In the example I used above, the cops were very passive about the threats-- not cool when you have kids at home. Didn't matter to the cops, apparently.

Further complicating this is thatracial profiling has further vilified cops in those communities. When the cops arrest your childhood friend around the block that you know is innocent, it lowers trust even more.

Like I said, idealistically, you're absolutely correct, but it's a hodgepodge of issues.

[Hombre_Corriendo]

You are of course 100% correct when you state that there is no such thing as a "monolithic" (good word, btw) black community with a single set of experiences, values, etc. That reminds me of a quote by an ex POTUS who railed at the mention of "the voice of the people" when one of his advisors used that term.

"Voice of the people?" he replied. "There is no such thing; you've got 240 million voices all yelling for different things. The only ONE thing they agree on is they don't want to pay taxes."

But I think the primary reason we often hear the term "black community" is because, being a minority, they are significantly smaller than the white community. So a lot of white DO look at the black community as a smaller, easier-to-manage, and yes, monolithic group. Also, I think some of us (white people) tend to think of black leaders and spokesman from the past. People like the great Martin Luther King Jr.; Malcolm X; Jesse Jackson; and the Reverend Al Sharpton. And since those guys got a lot of coverage in the media, especially when speaking on behalf of--or at least claiming to--the black community, we feel that still, today, there should be a single unified voice representing them. And many whites feel that blacks NEED another positive leader like King.
Again, this is primarily because the community is small compared to us of the Caucasian persuasion. It is a bit contradictory that WE don't ever claim to need a spokesman of leader of the same type, but I guess the POTUS is supposed to fill that slot for us!

[BubbyBobble]

Originally Posted by Hombre_Corriendo

You are of course 100% correct when you state that there is no such thing as a "monolithic" (good word, btw) black community with a single set of experiences, values, etc. That reminds me of a quote by an ex POTUS who railed at the mention of "the voice of the people" when one of his advisors used that term.

"Voice of the people?" he replied. "There is no such thing; you've got 240 million voices all yelling for different things. The only ONE thing they agree on is they don't want to pay taxes."

But I think the primary reason we often hear the term "black community" is because, being a minority, they are significantly smaller than the white community. So a lot of white DO look at the black community as a smaller, easier-to-manage, and yes, monolithic group. Also, I think some of us (white people) tend to think of black leaders and spokesman from the past. People like the great Martin Luther King Jr.; Malcolm X; Jesse Jackson; and the Reverend Al Sharpton. And since those guys got a lot of coverage in the media, especially when speaking on behalf of--or at least claiming to--the black community, we feel that still, today, there should be a single unified voice representing them. And many whites feel that blacks NEED another positive leader like King.
Again, this is primarily because the community is small compared to us of the Caucasian persuasion. It is a bit contradictory that WE don't ever claim to need a spokesman of leader of the same type, but I guess the POTUS is supposed to fill that slot for us!

The thing is, those ''leaders'' are remnants of the civil rights movements. They no longer are ''needed'' technically. Once they die, there is no ''leader''.

Many blacks, like Trayvon Martin's family went to Al Sharpton and others because they know he's the loudest. Just like someone feeling wrong by Obama will go to Glen Beck.

[Hombre_Corriendo]

Originally Posted by BubbyBobble

The thing is, those ''leaders'' are remnants of the civil rights movements. They no longer are ''needed'' technically. Once they die, there is no ''leader''.

Many blacks, like Trayvon Martin's family went to Al Sharpton and others because they know he's the loudest. Just like someone feeling wrong by Obama will go to Glen Beck.

I disagree with you when you say those type of leaders "are no longer needed." (Well, at least the types like King and Jackson. IMHO Sharpton does more harm than good, as he has a profound talent for widening the gulf between blacks and whites.)

The "black community" (sorry, I know you hate the phrase but it is useful for illustrative purposes here) is NO better off than they were 30 years ago. And they really should be, as I believe that racism has indeed diminished (a bit, not as much as it should have--the OJ thing set with-black relations back 20 years).
There are more opportunities and less oppression for blacks, yet most inner city, black-majority communities are as bad as they have ever been.

The problem all starts at home and with the kids and with education. A Leader can fill part of that void.

[bigjretrac]

Originally Posted by Jeo123

You're actually getting to the core of liberal/conservative.

Conservative view points are typically that you are responsible for your own well being and it's up to you to work to improve your situation. No other group (government or other race) should be able to hinder you, but at the same time, they are not responsible for you.

Liberal view points are typically that those who "are better" are obligated to help solve the problem of the people who aren't. Whether it's being better educated and helping those who know less, better financed and helping those without money, or better empowered helping those who have less power, it always comes back to those who "are better" have an obligation to help those who aren't.

The same liberal way of phrasing the question regarding the black community would simply be "why don't more people help the black community do xyz?" or "Why don't more people help change the black community's relationship with xyz"

It's just a matter of where you stand on the political spectrum when it comes to left vs right.

It's also a well documented observation that people are more likely to notice a stance that they don't agree with than one that they agree with. A conservative watchin Bill O'Riely will quickly notice if he took a liberal stance on a topic. By the same logic, if a conservative wound up on a left leaning talk show, the conservative stance would quickly attract the ire of the audience faster than the 10 left leaning stances mentioned before.

There's also no lack of "white racist" type statements that get made indicating that "all white people should atone and repent for the behaviors of other white people." People just tend to notice the things they don't like the most. I don't really think either one is more prevalent than the other personally.

This is the core of where I get stuck. I dislike that liberal way of thinking, but I'm also not a fan of the conservative line of thought either. Both sides tend to over correct the opposing side. That's just me and politics, though, always feeling caught in the middle...

[bigjretrac]

Originally Posted by Hombre_Corriendo

I disagree with you when you say those type of leaders "are no longer needed." (Well, at least the types like King and Jackson. IMHO Sharpton does more harm than good, as he has a profound talent for widening the gulf between blacks and whites.)

While King was a bit extreme on some things, the spirit of what he said was more unifying. It was more along the lines of, "can't we all just be friends?" vs. Sharpton's, "these white Moderator cut: language are gonna pay!" We need more people like King-- and people who can speak to it as an American issue, not a black issue.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by BubbyBobble

This.

People also don't seem to realize the fact that NOT ALL BLACK PEOPLE LIVE IN ONE AREA. For example, I live in a mostly white suburb. So....if there is a bad area full of black people....I'm supposed to go there and fight the crime? Should I go to bad parts of ATL or Philly in my free time?

This is very true. I grew up in the mostly white suburbs. My parents are from mostly black parts of the rural south. "Inner city america" has never been my experience (or my parents, other than a couple years of college, which isn't the same either).

Right now I live in a middle class and mixed part of Oakland (it is almost even across all the ethnic groups: black, white, latino and asian with no actual majority). I actually do know where the "hood" is in Oakland, but I don't have a big reason to go there. And we have "hoods" that are pretty mixed in Oakland (contrary to popular belief).

In another thread, there was a discussion on street harassment, and I shared a few of my negative experiences. Someone said "well you should stop going to the "hood" or living in Oakland, and you won't be harassed."
A. I don't go to the "hood" often
B. Most of the experiences happened outside of Oakland, in nice suburbs and downtown SF

Originally Posted by bigjretrac

Note, I'm assuming the discussion is framed around the US.

This is a pet peeve of mine-- that black people are a monolithic group with a singular experience.

Part of the issue is that there's a distortion of race and class. If a white person does something trashy, it's an issue of class ("white trash"). If a black person does something trashy, it's an issue of race. Black poverty is a complex issue, but for those black people who didn't grow up in such conditions, it can be annoying to constantly be pegged into that group. That's when the annoying comments come in, such as, "you're so well spoken-- you're not like those people," as if that's my predisposition, being black and all.

This is very true, and many social issues are caused by poverty, and have little to do with race.

There is this assumption, that if you are black in the US, you live in the hood. You are the first person in your family to go to college (if you happen to have went) and all sorts of other things. People assume if you sound a certain way or speak a certain way, you are either "not black" or some sort of weird alien creature that should be praised for using proper grammar.

Another part is that people oftentimes perceive Black America to be somehow delineated from American culture. When the high school student from Long Island got accepted to all the Ive League schools this past spring, a lot of the media included his being African American in the headline, as if that made a huge difference. Granted, some of this is perpetuated by a sizeable number of black people, but it contributes to this idea that "black" issues aren't American issues.

The reality is that the circumstances surrounding Black Americans over the past 300 years have been tumultuous, with ugly legacies of these experiences serving as a persistent scar in contemporary society. Let me be clear that I'm talking about both sides of the aisle. There's definitely an unwarranted amount of bitterness among some black people towards white people, but let's not act like we live in this mystical post-racial society we often hear about.

Unfortunately we still need to hype up the stories with positive images of black kids, because apparently it is still shocking. It is a double-edged sword though, because when people see an example of one "successful" black person, then they think, "well that person made it, why can't everyone else." Without looking at the overall structural issues. There have always been a few people who were allowed to rise to the top, even in the worst of times. The question is, how do we get rid of the roadblocks so most people can, instead of a few lucky people who happened to have both the right luck and circumstance to succeed.

[phlinak]

Originally Posted by jade408

It doesn't take long to find a thread in politics or current events or somewhere else on this forum for someone to ask a question like "Why does the black community do XYZ?" or "what is wrong with the black community in relationship to XYZ?"

This implies all black people are the same (behave the same way), and all black people should atone and repent for the behaviors of other black people.

Why don't we hold other groups to the same standard? What is with this obsession with defining the "black community," that is monolithic community with a single set of experiences, behaviors, values and actions? Why doesn't American individualism apply to black people?

*I posted this here hoping we can have a civilized scours on this without devolving to stereotyping and the like!

I think that American individualism absolutely applies to us as well but too many of us subscribe to this antiquated notion of "groupthink" that was a true and necessary survival mechanism many years ago but is not really relevant today.

In the relatively recent past, we had limited options when it came to education, employment, housing, marriage, and socializing. We were pretty limited to attending schools, acquiring jobs, and buying houses in our own neighborhoods, as well as, dating, marrying, and socializing with "our own kind".

Thankfully, today we are not relegated to just "our own kind" and we are free, if not encouraged, to attend any school, pursue any occupation, buy any property, and date, marry, or socialize with whomever we want, by choice.

However, many (if not most) of us, for a myriad of reasons, still subscribe to the idea of "needing to be around other blacks" simply because they're black and the assumption that they will automatically have the same social, political, economic, and religious views, thus forming "black" communities and leading to the accompanying queries, "Why does the black community do XYZ?" or "what is wrong with the black community in relationship to XYZ?".

Personally, I reject the whole notion of "needing to be around other blacks". I realized at a very young age that I needed to be around people who share my values (if not my views) regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, sex, social status, age, sexual orientation, or any other demographic and that what I pursued and what influenced my decisions concerning my choices in regards to where I attended school, what I do for a career, where I live, who I dated and married, and who I socialize with.

I believe that as long as we accept the notions that we have to "our own" (read: black) leaders, "our own" schools, "our own" businesses, and "our own" neighborhoods and communities, as long as we continue to separate ourselves (as a group) from the rest of society, we will be marginalized and not fully accepted as an integral part of society.

[Pinkmani]

Why? Because we're still separated from America. Part of that is our own fault. I admit, I'd say "I'm black" before I'd say "I'm American".

[Opin_Yunated]

Originally Posted by Pinkmani

Why? Because we're still separated from America. Part of that is our own fault. I admit, I'd say "I'm black" before I'd say "I'm American".

Yes, that is a problem.

I consider myself American. Black describes my racial descent, not my nationality. They aren't really related when you think about it. If I pack my things and move to Canada, I would be a Black Canadian.

Anyway, my earlier point was... why are black people more responsible for the actions of other blacks than any other ethnic group?

When a white man commits a crime, it isn't a "white community" problem. Why can't it work the same way with Blacks? (This question is more directed at non-black folks)