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.
As a black Libertarian, who has spent majority of his life as a black conservative, I am no stranger to going against mainstream or accepted "black opinion" and viewpoints. And till this day, I have many positions about the black community that most black people would not agree with. Butt I have noticed a very disturbing viewpoint when it comes to addressing police brutality in the black community, and it's often "what about black on black crime".
Now at one time, I took this position. On the surface it seems quite logical. It's the old "clean up your own backyard, before you tell someone else to clean theirs" mentality. Except the argument doesn't hold up to deeper evaluation, and once one look deeper, it is unsupportable as a rational point of view. I do not attempt to speak for all black people who are against the entire "black on black crime" rebutttal, since I'm sure my POV is much different than theirs.
1. How EXACTLY do you fight black on black crime?
So I'm one of those people who actually sat back and thought about how someone solves an issue with black on black crime. What does this strategy look like? What is the gameplan? No one will answer this? Because stopping black on black crime is basically stopping crime itself. And if we could stop all crime, then what good are police? so this is where the argument breaks down.
Why are black people even responsible for stopping black on black crime? In theory isn't that what we pay police to do? So if it is up to black people to stop black on black crime, then essentially what you're saying that black people should police themselves? Since this responsibility OBVIOUSLY don't fall on cops, and falls on black individuals.
Actually I do support black people removing police out of their community, and policing themselves. But that's another topic for another time.
2. Black on black crime isn't ACTUALLY that bad
The bizzare narrative is that black on black crime hasn't been lower in over 50 years than it is today. As a whole black on black crime is down, and has gone down continously for 20 years. So the common rebuttle is this:
"Crime is still disproportionately high in the black community" - Except it's not, since crime is low overall in America relative to the population. This would mean that majority of black people aren't likely to be directly impacted by "black on black crime".
"Crime has gone up in Chicago" - This is also quite irrational. So because black on black crime is up in 1 city, does this automatically mean it's every black person's problem? So one has to ask, what is the assumed values of such a system?
Do we assume that because people in Chicago are black, and commit crime, and if you happen to be black, that crime local to Chicago is somehthing a black person could do anything about?
Again, how does a black person in LA fight crime in Chicago?
Isn't this more of a function of the failures of the Chicago PD than the black race as a whole?
3. There actually was a community effort to stop violence when violence was high in every black community
Before hip hop was just a whored out art form for corporate record companies, it was actually part of a huge social movement. It was an amazing way that people in the streets organized, talked about life in poverty, and mostly had positive messages. People who think rap has always been gangsta "shoot em up" should listen to 80s hip hop before it became mainstream. In many cases reformed gang members and gang leaders used hip hop as a medium for peace. And in many cases it reached out to black people, caused many cease fires in gang wars in LA, and I feel was instrumental in the drop in black on black crime from the 80s and 90s. Yet the main people who talk about black on black crime has no sense of history, because if they did, the black community does respond when black on black crime is at epidemic levels.
In conclusion. The "black on black crime" is a convenient rebuttal, and it speaks to ignorance about the history on black on black crime, unfair assumptions about black people's responsibility, and the lack of responsibility on the behalf of police.
I agree with you. The problem is none of that matters. A huge portion of White conservatives are racist at some level. I grew up in the White racist bubble, until I moved away I didn't break out of it. The reality is most people who use the "black on black crime" argument already are racist, they already start with the idea something inherent in black people and their culture is bad and makes it more crime ridden then White culture. From there they will latch onto anything.
Usually when I try to talk with fellow White who believe what I used to about such things they'll point to poverty being an indicator of crime and has nothing to do with race. The thing is the Black poverty rate in the US is about 26% vs White at 10%. So poverty is racist in the US... but we can't stop there... either
a) You think something inherent in black people cause them to be more poverty stricken and hence more crime ridden. Basically racism... or
b) You keep digging and realize there's some cause that makes Black people more poor than White people.
Once you face the obviousness of such a question and the available answers it's not hard to dig beyond just Black people being poorer, but why. If someone is familiar with US history it's not hard to understand why. Black people are not and haven never been equal in the US. racism didn't end with slavery, it lead to KKK and jim crow (and over 4,000 lynchings in the South between 1870 and 1950), which then lead to Civil Rights and whites in the South fighting violently to keep segregation... which lead to the war on drugs targeting blacks, which still leads to today. Things have improved but they never have been equal so it's no surprise. Racism doesn't just end because of some legislation.
When exactly did the government start engineering rap music and hip hop culture?
I don't make these statement casually? But it's a combination of the CIA trying suppress communist activities in the black community, in addition to the welfare.
As a black Libertarian, who has spent majority of his life as a black conservative, I am no stranger to going against mainstream or accepted "black opinion" and viewpoints. And till this day, I have many positions about the black community that most black people would not agree with. Butt I have noticed a very disturbing viewpoint when it comes to addressing police brutality in the black community, and it's often "what about black on black crime".
Now at one time, I took this position. On the surface it seems quite logical. It's the old "clean up your own backyard, before you tell someone else to clean theirs" mentality. Except the argument doesn't hold up to deeper evaluation, and once one look deeper, it is unsupportable as a rational point of view. I do not attempt to speak for all black people who are against the entire "black on black crime" rebutttal, since I'm sure my POV is much different than theirs.
1. How EXACTLY do you fight black on black crime?
So I'm one of those people who actually sat back and thought about how someone solves an issue with black on black crime. What does this strategy look like? What is the gameplan? No one will answer this? Because stopping black on black crime is basically stopping crime itself. And if we could stop all crime, then what good are police? so this is where the argument breaks down.
Why are black people even responsible for stopping black on black crime? In theory isn't that what we pay police to do? So if it is up to black people to stop black on black crime, then essentially what you're saying that black people should police themselves? Since this responsibility OBVIOUSLY don't fall on cops, and falls on black individuals.
Actually I do support black people removing police out of their community, and policing themselves. But that's another topic for another time.
2. Black on black crime isn't ACTUALLY that bad
The bizzare narrative is that black on black crime hasn't been lower in over 50 years than it is today. As a whole black on black crime is down, and has gone down continously for 20 years. So the common rebuttle is this:
"Crime is still disproportionately high in the black community" - Except it's not, since crime is low overall in America relative to the population. This would mean that majority of black people aren't likely to be directly impacted by "black on black crime".
"Crime has gone up in Chicago" - This is also quite irrational. So because black on black crime is up in 1 city, does this automatically mean it's every black person's problem? So one has to ask, what is the assumed values of such a system?
Do we assume that because people in Chicago are black, and commit crime, and if you happen to be black, that crime local to Chicago is somehthing a black person could do anything about?
Again, how does a black person in LA fight crime in Chicago?
Isn't this more of a function of the failures of the Chicago PD than the black race as a whole?
3. There actually was a community effort to stop violence when violence was high in every black community
Before hip hop was just a whored out art form for corporate record companies, it was actually part of a huge social movement. It was an amazing way that people in the streets organized, talked about life in poverty, and mostly had positive messages. People who think rap has always been gangsta "shoot em up" should listen to 80s hip hop before it became mainstream. In many cases reformed gang members and gang leaders used hip hop as a medium for peace. And in many cases it reached out to black people, caused many cease fires in gang wars in LA, and I feel was instrumental in the drop in black on black crime from the 80s and 90s. Yet the main people who talk about black on black crime has no sense of history, because if they did, the black community does respond when black on black crime is at epidemic levels.
In conclusion. The "black on black crime" is a convenient rebuttal, and it speaks to ignorance about the history on black on black crime, unfair assumptions about black people's responsibility, and the lack of responsibility on the behalf of police.
No intelligent person will take black LIES matter seriously until they fix their own neighborhooda
Blacks are responsible for stopping black on black crime because ITS THEIR CHILDREN who are injuring and killing each other as well as causing never ending violence and crime in not only their own communities but in other communities as well. If many black people were so nice and friendly to live around, everyone wouldn't feel the need to move away from them including other black people.
As for what black people could do to lower crime in their communities, how about raising their kids properly in the first place with some morals, compassion and respect for their fellow human being? And how about ratting out all the criminals and thugs that are causing so much trouble in black communities instead of hiding them because they're your homies or family members or you just plain don't want to turn them in because EFF DA POLICE?
...
...
The bottom line is 'black crime' and 'black on black crime' exists and is labeled as such because it describes the group of people who are most affected by crime, violence and murder much, MUCH more badly than most every other race/ethnic group of people and have been for decades now with no end in sight.
1. As a White person who lived in western NYS, the Maryland and Virginia suburbs of D.C., and Colorado Springs, I don't ever remember anyone telling me that it was my responsibility to be responsible for stopping White on White crime. When we were affected by crime, we called the police.
2. Over the years, about 20% of the students I taught were Black. I don't recall seeing fewer morals, less compassion, or less respect than the typical White kid in my classes or school.
3. You offer no real solution, just a continuance of the situation as is.
As a white female, I am sorry your people don't care more for each other......I don't see how this really is our problem.
Just today, turning on my computer I was presented with black teens setting 3 puppies on fire and burning them alive, for entertainment to put on the Internet. Then I see black teenagers with mask on their faces screaming they, "Hate America", "F**K America", "F**K the American flag", stomping on the Flag and burning it.....yet they want rights and protection. I don't feel I should be the first person to offer them a damn thing.
All these young people did was enrage me and I would like for them to leave the country! I have a hard time seeing they want to make this a better place, and I wonder how many are riding the welfare train?
I know whites are just as messed up......in my area those kids would be in trouble with the public, animal rights activist would pay them a visit, is this accepted in the black community?
1. I thought Americans were "our people".
2. Do you actually think that White kids have never tortured animals?
3. And that's the problem -- you enjoy being enraged; you don't enjoy seeking solutions.
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.
