| Author |
Message |
    
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 01:01 am: | 
|
Sometime ago I read a couple of threads that mentioned Thomas Sowell (http://aalbc.com/authors/thomas.htm) one poster said, in effect, Sowell's Memoir (A personal Odessey) was one fo their favorite books for the year, while another poster (not mentioning any names - smile) said basically they hate Sowell.
There are many authors who, with the same exact words, can generate both hatred and respect, amoung a given group of readers. I use Sowell as an example 'cause he is not as widely read or discussed in the black community (Sowell is Black, raised in Harlem) as I think he should.
I find Sowell's work very intersting. I also respect him for defending postitions, which certainly go against popular opinion in the Black community, in a rational manner. Maybe I'll convince Thumper to add a Sowell non-fiction work to the month discussion.
For those who have read Sowell's work or articles why do you like or dislike him?
|
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:09 am: |
|
I haven't read his work in a very long, long time. I think the book i read assessed race and the market and he tried to argue that racism would be less essential if blacks were more qualified, since companies would lose money for discriminating against qualified people. He also discusses meritocracy, etc....
Personally, he was making too many assumptions that i thought/think are questionable. Blacks were not hired because they were unqualifed. "Qualifications" mean what exactly? For the most part, people will usually have credentials and the necessary experience when they come to a job. If both individuals have comparable credentials how do you choose, etc.... Same thing about merit.
Last we on Girl Friends, ol' big eyes didn't get the promotion she sought. She won her cases, but she wasn't a "go getter," like the other sister they did hire. No, lets look at Soul Food. Similar situation, but the sister is a go-getter and she wins cases, brings the company clients, etc.... but they didn't promote her, gave her more money but not partner. They didn't want a nigger's name on the building... In girlfriends, they were supposedly going on merit...but both cases happen in real life....chance, uncertainty....all of this is missing from Sowell's analysis.
I also read a book about ethnicity and basically he argued that racism exists. Yet, racism is not responsible for African AMericans' failure to economically and educationally integrate into the mainstream, he opines. Since west indians and africans and other immigrants of color are performing better educational exams and making more money, racism is not the culprit. African AMericans' laziness and abhorrent(did i make that word up?)culture are responsible for their failures. Interesting... i think, but again his argument is problematic. there is scholarship that illustrates that once West Indians are here for several generations, their education, etc... is equal to African Americans. Also the methods of his research is problematic.... his analysis relies on race, not generational poverty, what types of education immigrants bring with them to the US, and other issues.....the important question is are these groupd comparable and can you discuss racism without discussing political power, etc...... |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 10:26 am: |
|
I dislike him because I think he is a fraud--here is a professor of economics who hardly ever writes/comments on economics, always on race--and he is not a sociologist. He is supposed to be an academic, yet he never comes up with statistics but uses anecdotal evidence or his opinions.
He is a gun for hire for social conservatives who like to use him to justify their racist opinions and positions to retard African American progress. Rush Limbaugh used to use him, doesn't much anymore, maybe because he was so wimpishly pathetic as a talkshow guest.
Like many blacks who used affirmative action to get where they are he opposes it now--all I can think is he wants to slam the door behind him and keep the benefits for himself--like Martin Kilson of Harvard. He is continually described as "brave", how can he get in trouble with the power structure for his views.
If I thought he came by his views honestly I might disagree but at least respect him ( I keep wondering what these Black conservatives are trying to conserve) but I think he just sees a way to a gravy train writing dull, unoriginal columns and books (surely a form of affirmative action in itself) for use by the radical right. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 01:56 pm: |
|
Thomas Sowell and Shelby Steele are both very clever at offering "specious" arguments, and because there is an element of truth in what they say, they are able to rankle liberals. I don't have a big problem with what these 2 conservative authors contend mostly because so many black liberal leaders have a vested interest in promoting victimization, and I question their motives. There should be room for different points of view in the black political spectrum.
|
Claxton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 07:36 pm: |
|
Cynique, I agree with you on this point, and unfortunately it's not one that we've been real quick to come around on. While I don't necessarily agree with Sowell and Steele, I admire the fact that they're not willing to tow the old line and are willing to think a little for themselves.
The timing of your thread couldn't be better. In Sunday's edition of The Charlotte Observer, they ran a story of a black man who has been desperately trying to make it as a country singer. The one thing that he said that stuck with me is that while white listeners have applauded his efforts, blacks openly question whether they think he just wants to be white.
Okay, so you're not going to find many of us listening to country. But truth be told, I'd rather crank up some Johnny Cash or Porter Waggoner than listen to a lot of today's black music.
To read the story of Brian Blake, click on this link:
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/5067065.htm |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 08:03 pm: |
|
i think the difficulties with liberals and conservatives (black or white) and politics in general is that you're not allowed to be complicated. Politics rejects nuance, so that at the end of the day, for the most part, we are limited with only two options...and usually both are problematic. |
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 08:37 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Well, Troy, you of all people should know that the first step is convincing me is by sending me a copy of the book. *eyebrow raised* It's one of my rules, you know. In today's America, I still believe that a "black republican" is an oxymoron. It might be interesting to read Sowell...if I had a book.
Claxton: I listen to country music, always has. So many black singers have covered country music and have no shame in saying that they're a big fan of it. So, I wonder who they ask. |
Claxton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:00 pm: |
|
Unfortunately, Thumper, our own people tend to put each other in boxes just as much as others do. One of those boxes is that we don't listen to country music.
Then again, most black people wouldn't recognize a black singer covering country. I got my family good on this one a few years back. There was some music special on, and at the end of it, Dolly Parton was singing her hit song "I Will Always Love You". Immediately, they began criticizing her, saying that she was stealing from Whitney Houston. They were a bit shocked that Dolly had mined gold with that song when Whitney was still in diapers.
BTW, Thumper, I know you know Johnny Cash (who doesn't?!), but do you know Porter Waggoner? I'd really be impressed if you (or anyone else who frequents the board) does know--without going to Google to look him up!! 8-) |
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:12 pm: |
|
Deep.
Yukio you make an interesting point; "'Qualifications' mean what exactly?" It is impossible to answer this question in the general. However if we look at specific jobs it becomes a little easier to address. We find little difficulty determining, for example who is better qualified to represent the US's Olympic the 100 meter track team than it is to determine who more qualified to be hired as a manager in corporate America. As you introduce more variables into the equation evaluating relative qualifications becomes much more difficult, throw into the personal bias and it becomes impossible.
Chris, so does that mean you dislike Sowell? (smile). You said a lot and I won't address everything (at least not now) but I will say this: your statement, "yet he never comes up with statistics but uses anecdotal evidence or his opinions", is simply inaccurate. I'm not surprised that Sowell is "wimpishly pathetic as a talk show guest". I have never seen him on television. However I'm sure he was if was very charismatic (assuming that he is indeed whimpy) Sowell would be far more popular.
For example I find Stanley Crouch extremely entertaining when he speaks; whether the topic is Jazz or the state of black literature he is quite engaging. Louis Farrakhan (circa 1980s) is probably one of my favorite public speakers he is quite captivating -- he was able to get all those brothers to Washington DC for a reason. The two brothers are quite different in their views however both have a gift when is comes to communicating ideas verbally. It is unfortunate that charisma, in our society, determines if you get heard – no matter how important what you had to say it (thank God MLK knew how to move the crowd). If you are a woman to have to be good looking on too.
Chris, like I said, you did say a lot; but I’d like to probe this a little. I’d appreciate it if you could take just one issue, on which you disagree with Sowell, and describe why. I’d like to understand your reasoning.
Hey Cynique: I read Steele's "Content of our Character" about a decade ago, I don't recall being too impressed -- but that could be based upon when I read it versus what he said, but it was a long time ago. I see now, after looking him up that he and Sowell are cohorts at the Hoover institution. Perhaps they both sit around all day scheming on how to hamper black progress in America (smile). I see Steele’s latest book, “A Dream Deferred” is described by saying “…Steele argues that too much of what has been done since the Great Society in the name of black rights has far more to do with the moral redemption or self-satisfaction of whites than with any real improvement in the lives of blacks.” This is a common theme in Sowell’s articles. In today’s world, I agree with the statement. However well intentioned and loving the man is who gives me the fish today, I’m going the benefit more, in the long term, from the dude who teaches me to fish – even if I despise him every second of the lesson.
This sentiment is nothing new. James Brown expressed it when he said “just open up the do’ and I’ll get it ‘mah self”. Another brother Salome Thomas-El in his soon to be released book “I Choose to Stay: A Black teacher Refuses to desert the Inner City” (Dafina Books, March 2003 more on this book later) expressed it more directly “We wanted to get away from the old idea of begging the system for money”. Thomas-El was talking about getting the community to support their own children.
Sowell’s message may not be easy to read because it goes against so much we programmed to believe.
|
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:38 pm: |
|
Boy am I a slow poster. In the time it took me to write my reply there were 4 other posts!
I don't think this is a political (republic, demoncrat, conservative, liberal, etc) issue to construe it as such only muddies the water. In fact, Sowell is not a Republican.
Country music I understand is one of the most popular forms of music in the US today. However you could not tell looking at my CD/LP collection.
|
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:52 pm: |
|
Hello Claxton,
Oh course I know who Porter Waggoner is -- white hair, and was Dolly Parton's duet partners for a number of years. I got a question for you, Claxton. Surprisingly enough, a black male singer, before Charley Pride, had a number 1 country single...BEFORE...Billboard was ever invented. Can you name that singer and the song he took to number 1? *eyebrow raised* |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 11:51 pm: |
|
Well, folks, let's not forget that the great Ray Charles put out an album of country music a while back and it did very well, becoming a classic. Along these lines, I recently saw "O, Brother, Where Are You" on Cable TV. It was a very charming little movie, full ol time country music which I found myself thoroughly enjoying. And I was surprised that I remember singing some of the old religous hymns that were performed in the movie back when I was a little girl in Sunday school. The sound track for this movie sold millions of copies, went on to top the charts, and win an Oscar. An interesting side line was that one of the work songs on this track was written by black man who'd worked on a chain gang. The movie's producers tracked him down and paid him his royalties, and turned a poor old black brother into a man of means. Also, I remember reading that Dolly Parton wanted to perform her song "I'll Always Love You" as a duet with Whitney Houston on some award show, and Whitney told her to go take a hike. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 12:16 am: |
|
Troy: In entitling his book "By The Content Of Their Character," Shelby Steele did what a lot of conservatives do: they envoke Martin Luther King quotes in their arguments, figuring that by doing this, other blacks will be reluctant to dispute them.
Yuko: I agree with your comment about the lack of room for nuance in the conservative and liberal labels. I am conservative on some issues, liberal on many, and down right radical on others!
Claxton: Well, ol buddy, I see your still the trivia buff!
Thumper: What do you think of Colin Powell? |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 01:27 am: |
|
Troy,
It is political, and always will be, since these black intellectuals' ideas and their literature or scholarship will be used by either dem. or repub., either to affirm their positions or criticize. Once "scholarship" is in the public sphere people will use it anyway they wish. Btw, political has to do with power and we are talking about power aren't we?
Look at how many conservatives use "Content of my character" mess....they obviously haven't read or heard the entire speech where King basically says, "show me the money"...well not exactly, but i thought it would be cute...lol! Now we have a bunch of us people thinking that MLK didn't affirm affirmative action.
Also, black conservatives are problematic because they essentially argue that black people are lazy and that if we worked harder and had less children then we would be better off. Thats true for everyone. Most people, and now i'm talking about the country, not just african americans, are working class...with very little skills, usually working in the service sector. Now that has to do with deindustrialization, movement of companies to markets with cheaper labor, etc...
In other words, everyone will not get a law degree, or ph.d, or even read the New York Time Book Review Section. Capitalism nor any economic system is made for everyone to "live the American dream."
Cynique:
I agree most of us have multi-political views. I think, however, that that some positions are dangerous to make.
One of the most dangerous comments is the argument that a person's success is determined by their effort or "Merit." And i think that some black conservatives try to preach that crap to white and black folk... and we all believe it.
Now, whatever i do i work hard at it, so i do agree that the correct formula for success is hard word, luck, and faith. This formula does not preclude racism, however. And if it's racism why should we not call it racism? So i'm not preaching victimization, but i do think that you can work as hard as you want and if they don't want to hire you or give you a raise or promotion, as my Soul Food example suggests, then ya hard working butt aint gonna get it.
Everyone needs a hook up, a chance, a cousin, something to give them that extra push.
GWB is a perfect example... it's not that bright, but he is the president. He wasn't suppose to be in Yale, but his father was an alum and his grandfather was on the board of trustees. |
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 08:49 am: |
|
yukio, as soon as someone says a Black (or white on for that matter) Republican said it msny black people shut down. When I say this is not a political issues I mean that I'm not trying to increase my own wealth, or power. I simply want to want to understand how people can arrive at conclusions diamterically oppsoed to each other after readering the same text witten by people like Thomas Sowell. So lets drop the the "Black conservative" and other labels, as it applies to these ideas, for a minute and look at your statement:
"black conservatives are problematic because they essentially argue that black people are lazy and that if we worked harder and had less children then we would be better off. Thats true for everyone."
"Lazy" is a relative addjective. But who can agrue with harder work being beneficial. You agree with the statement, so why is it "Problematic"?
In your next statement:
"Most people, and now i'm talking about the country, not just african americans, are working class...with very little skills, usually working in the service sector. Now that has to do with deindustrialization, movement of companies to markets with cheaper labor"
In not sure I follow you; are you saying that most people have "very little skills" because of deindustrialization and globalization? If so that would be a stretch at the very least.
Did GWB have a "leg up"; or course. Is he the best man the country has to offer for the job; of course not. There have only been 40 odd president positions in the last 2 centuries despite what you mother said it is a very difficult job to obtain. Currently wealth, political power, even race have a lot to do with getting that position (you have a better chance of getting into the NBA).
The vast majority of the remaining jobs ability is a little higher up on the set of criteria for hiring.
Sure eveyone can benefit from the "Hook Up", but unfortuanately there are very few hook ups for African Americans unless they go outside their race. Why? Because we own very few large business. Even for brothers and sisters in corporate American; very few are in a position to hook someone up for a job. I submit to you that those who are, are looking for the best and brightst individual they find.
Finally why is the statement: "...a person's success is determined by their effort or 'Merit'." so dangerous? Are you suggesting it is determined by something else, if so what could be more important today?
Look I'm not trying to say that other factors are not in the mix however I think they are give far too much consideration -- to the point where people give up and stop trying. People believe well it does not matter how much or what I know the "white man" is going still keep me down. Many of my boys and I believed this growing up and there weren't any white men anywhere in the neighborhood. There were no white man forcing us to not do our homework or snatvhing us out the library forcing us not to read...
Peace
|
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 11:06 am: |
|
Troy,
I agree with most of what you've said. Particularly that we don't have many African Americans in positions to "hook up" other brothers and sisters.
Let me try to respond point by point:
"I simply want to want to understand how people can arrive at conclusions diamterically oppsoed to each other after readering the same text witten by people like Thomas Sowell."
Reading is an initimate and subjective experience. It is also a historical, cultural, political, and economic experience in the sense that an individual is constitutive of all these elements, which helped them render an opinion on what they read. As far an interpretation is concerned, therefore, readers bring all of their individuality to the text and they bear witness. I don't necessarily think readers should be limited to what the author "means" because you can never know unless you ask the author. In other words, people will always have different interpretations.
Now, with that said, i believe that my quotes were taken out of context, because my post was for the benefit of you and the general AALBC. Let me try to put them back.
1. The statement you quoted can be understood, i think, if paired with another of my statements:
"Now, whatever i do i work hard at it, so i do agree that the correct formula for success is hard word, luck, and faith. This formula does not preclude racism, however. And if it's racism why should we not call it racism? So i'm not preaching victimization, but i do think that you can work as hard as you want and if they don't want to hire you or give you a raise or promotion, as my Soul Food example suggests, then ya hard working butt aint gonna get it."
The point is that there is no one solution to be successful and Black conservatives and this country's historical rhetoric in general has attempted to convince us that if we worked hard then we'd be successful. I'm going further! I say work hard And fight racism. Working hard in itself is not problematic, but to tell black people that racism is not an issue, only their work ethic or their "culture" is what is holding them back is problematic.
2. No, i'm not saying that globization and deindustrialization is solely responsible for people having low skills. The point was that a person's life chances aren't solely determined by their work ethic, effort, or "merit." We have to consider their family's wealth or access to wealth. We need to consider what type of political power their community has, which determines the qualitiy of the services within the community and the access to those services, which is why i say that is about power, i wasn't talking about wealth, i'm talking about the power to make people responsible to your needs.
Now, of course, there are people who succeed regardless of their socio-economic circumstance. I'm pointing out that these factors should be addressed, so that everyone regardless of class or race, etc.. can have computers in their schools, new books, accountable politicians, affordable places to shop for food, etc...
I was placing all of these factors into the larger world-system, inorder to make the point that their are global, national, state, and municipal forces that effect our life chances.
To tell people to work harder is nice and supportive, but to tell them that the economy is fine, that their is no racism, that Colin Powell, Oprah, etc... did it, well so can you is partially true. Everyone can not be rich! Someone has to do the dirty work and others have to do the dirtiest work!
3. Of course things should be based upon merit, but that is not the case and to act like it is is disingenuous to me. Merit goes back to being qualified, but we all know that is not the only variable that detemines if you'll get in a school or get a job. Touting the "merit" position is dangerous, because if i don't get a job because the employer didn't like my religion i'll never know because i'll just think that i wasn't the right person for the job or that a joe blow was better qualified.
Troy, black folk do work hard, so thats not the problem. There are some lazy azz negroes, but there are some lazy as asians, whites, etc.... The point is that most people work hard and that racial and class issues are relevant. It should not be an either or discussion, which is why i said that" the difficulties with liberals and conservatives (black or white) and politics in general is that you're not allowed to be complicated. Politics rejects nuance, so that at the end of the day, for the most part, we are limited with only two options...and usually both are problematic."
It is not enough to say that the US is racist as hell, nor is it enough to say that hard work will insure "the American Dream." Both positions are llimited, since their are other issues, all inter-rrelated with the last two, which shapes a person's life chances. |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 01:48 pm: |
|
Troy:
Re Sowell: Be glad to. Check out the URL below. It is a column where he defends Bush's tax cut.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell1.asp
He starts out, Someone (He never says who) quoted in the New York Times ( Doesn't give the date, or issue, besides All the yahoos know that is a Commie rag, right?) recently referred to the Bush
tax cut as one in which "most of the benefits would be showered on the richest taxpayers."
Fine. So, Professor, come up with chapter and verse from the tax bill and statistics to prove this is not so.
No way. He starts taling about Big spenders and big taxers--(Limbaugh speak for Democrats and welfare staters and socialists) The Federalist Papers (without giving us quotes or page numbers) the right to bear arms, talking about irrigation of rice in the California desert (where, when? How much territory)--talking about you and the farmers being directed by "the anointed" (East Coast liberals, Teddy Kennedy, etc).
This is fine for some drunk arguing with you over a couple of beers in a bar while you are really watching a football game. This is not a fit presentation from a supposed professor of economics. I think he must have got it from Scarecrow, University (a la Scarecrow from the wizard of oz)
This guy really gets me steamed. Steele, at least, has reasoned arguments, good intentions, and is not as right wing as they try to make him.
This is but an example. He's left a paper trail miles long--I won't say what kind, since this is a family site. |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 01:55 pm: |
|
Claxton: re the black country singer--
Most blacks just don't listen to country music regardless of the artist. I think it may be because traditionally, that was the music that was playin' in the front of the bus, while we was fumin' in the back. I think a lot of those country music fans have the same reaction when they hear black music.
It seems to me that Bruhman's biggest problem is lack of acceptance by those who do--ie the white country music fans.
After all, would you rush out and by an album by an all black polka band? |
Yvette
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 02:04 pm: |
|
Chris,
I got to give you an AMEN on that one! |
Claxton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 05:29 pm: |
|
Actually, Chris, that depends...Are they good?! You know, The Chicken Dance is a polka standard, and I happen to like it.
Thumper, I'm afraid you have me stumped, believe it or not. Share some knowledge with your Southern bro here. |
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 08:59 pm: |
|
Hello Claxton,
Here's the answer: (amazingly enough Carey probably knew it since he was the only one of us who is old enough to have seen this artist in person)
In 1944, Louis Jordan hit number one on the Country charts (then called Folk & Western Chart) with Ration Blues and Is You Is Or Is You Ain't My Baby (which he said he heard a white man say to his girlfriend and who later co-wrote the song). |
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 02:34 am: |
|
Chris
Would you drop me an email I’d like to ask you something off the discussion board on an unrelated issue (thanks)
Now on to the Sowell article…
These short editorial columns article are not designed for in depth analysis with footnotes. Sowell is an academic and writes in the fashion you described when the intended audience is not the general public.
This particular article is more of a rant than anything else. The spark that lit Sowell’s fire this time was, apparently, the quote from the Times - "most of the benefits would be showered on the richest taxpayers." (which b.t.w. may be found NYT, C1. 1/23/03Economic inequality grew in 90's boom, Fed reports, by Edmund Andrews)
Sowell reacts with “Keeping money that you yourself earned is called having benefits ‘showered’ on you! By this reasoning, anyone who has the power to take something from you and doesn't take it all is ‘showering’ benefits on you.”
He is ridiculing the absurdity of the statement “showered’ in the context of keeping a bit more of your own money. I can’t see how anyone other than someone who wanted to pay even more taxes than they pay now take issue with this article statement. He is in effect saying now that Bush is proposing a tax cut, don’t make it seem like you are doing me any favors by allowing me to keep more of the money I earned.
Sowell goes on assert that if the government did not over extend it’s charter there would not be a need to levy these outrageous taxes and I agree for the most part.
|
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 02:49 am: |
|
Yukio,
I appreciate the thoughtful replies.
Yes people do indeed bring their own perspectives and cognitive ability to what they read. Sometimes these two things in over or under abundance can prevent what the author intended to be communicated not to received by the reader. The same goes for verbal communications as well. There are times when the personal perspective is absolutely necessary to appreciate what an author is trying to convey. If you have no personal experience to draw upon you may not be able to appreciate what the author has to offer. Does a poem about love and loss appeal to in the same fashion way to some one who has experienced both as it would to someone who has experienced neither?
But in a work of non-fiction (and some may argue whether Sowell’s work is non-fiction) the author has to communicate in a way that leaves little room for confusion. If the author says “black” and the reader interprets “white” based upon their personal perspective then there is a real problem. If seems to me much of the criticism with Sowell’s writings has to do with people bringing personal perspective to bear versus what Sowell has actually put to page.
We agree on a lot of points. I think we diverge on the issue of racism and the significance of it’s impact on people in 2003. In reality it is not racism that is the problem. The simple belief that one race is superior to another is virtually harmless. Racism is a problem when it is used as a justification for evil. For example, whites used racism to justify slavery. “Compassionate” whites thought we were like children who needed someone to take care of us. They used racism and even religion to justify these conclusions. The same game is being run today. Religion, like racism is only bad in the hands of a devil.
Most people are not held back by racism as much as they are help back by anything else someone may use to prejudge you, whether that be age, sex, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, etc. We more often hurt my lack of education, drive, wealth, skills, entrepreneurship, etc.
All things being equal the wealthier person does have it a lot easier. Poorer people have to work harder to achieve the same thing a rich person can achieve with little or no effort. Poor people have to work their way through school. They have to work all day then come home and cook for the kids, etc. This is intuitive. But it is important to mention because it seems as though a lot of people do not appreciate this fact. They call it racism instead.
It has been this racist system which hobbled us initially, but it is not what prevents us from catching up. Poorer people may have to work for generations before they can catch up. That the way it works. This work ethic and the willingness to work for your children’s benefit over your own seems to have been lost over the few decades.
|
Yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 09:36 am: |
|
Troy,
You're right we do disagree on racism and, perhaps, our particular perception "of the ways of black folk."
I do believe institutional racism is at work and i think that th argument that black americans need to integrate culturally is also racist.
"This work ethic and the willingness to work for your children’s benefit over your own seems to have been lost over the few decades."
I would argue that people AREN"T reluctant to work for their children's benefit. I think black people and most people work hard as hell. Few one is lazy and most people do for their family and children. NOw, i'm not talking about a few people you know, i'm talking about nationally. And i'm nottalking about hese people that are on welfare, because i don't kow their situation. And i've known plenty of people on welfare and they weren't lazy.
The general point that i'm making is that Thomas Sowell and others seem to solely argue that the answer is that black people don't have a work ethic. I say, perhaps, but i also argue that racism, class, and gender discrimination are still issues, and so we should discuss the gamut, all the issues, not just that black people aren't working enough.
The idea that hard work will solve everything is an old and erroneous argument... quite simple in my book!
I think the movement of people, not just black people, is to complicate their undertanding of world history, and they will see that there is the individual's responsiblity and there is the country's responsiblity and arguing that i need to work harder absolves that country of any responsiblity. Thats Wrong!
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 10:16 am: |
|
Yukio and Troy,
What do you think about a statement which I think was attributed to a Clinton civil rights staff member. He said that one of the simplest ways to escape poverty for black females was "to graduate from high school, and to not get pregnant before the age of 21." This is, indeed, a simplistic solution but one that I think is not without some merit. |
Yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 10:47 am: |
|
Cynique:
It does have merit, but what i have been suggesting is that we can do our part but the state or "gov'ment" has to do its part, which is to insure that citizens have access to safe, healthy, and educational living conditions. Also, i argued that we are effected by the economy,wars,etc.. so that if this woman, for example, procures her h.s diploma but there aren't any jobs able available, who do we blame it on? DO we blame ourselves or capitalism, globalizism...what?
I would argue, as i have, that your life chances are determined by what you do AND what this society allows and helps you to! There is no either or! Both are part of the struggle. Fred Douglas, MKL, Malcolm X, and even Jes Jackson have critiqued both blacks and the US, so has Farrakhan. I'm making the same point. To do otherwise, in my opinion is irresponsible and unloyal to our(African American) history.
BTW, i also think that statement is racist as hell, since welfare, which is what CLinton's comment alludes to, is a US problem not a black woman's problem, as some liberals and conservatives want us to believe. We've all seen Jerry Springer, Ricky Lake, etc.... and what folk call Poor White Trash or welfare qieens is something that you'll find in all societies and ethnic groups! |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 01:08 pm: |
|
Troy:
All the man has to do is produce the facts and figures that this statement is fault. That he does not, and that he proceeds to deal in buzzwords and soundbytes, makes one believe that his argument is specious.
George F. Will does not write like this--disagree with his positions as one may be wont to do, one cannot say that they are not well reasoned, logical (though the logic is perverted) and well stated.
Sowell stoops to this all the time. He is either lazy, a liar, or ignorant. Plus, he sounds like Elmer Fudd live. |
Judy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 01:14 pm: |
|
Claxton:
++++Okay, so you're not going to find many of us listening to country. But truth be told, I'd rather crank up some Johnny Cash or Porter Waggoner than listen to a lot o f today's black music.++++
I agree with you 100 percent.
Cynique:
++++ What do you think about a statement which I think was attributed to a Clinton civil rights staff member. He said that one of the simplest ways to escape poverty for black females was "to graduate from high school, and to not get pregnant before the age of 21." This is, indeed, a simplistic solution but one that I think is not without some merit.++++
I agree with the Clinton staffer 100 percent. Indeed the statement may be too simplistic (there are a lot of valid reasons for not completing high school and for getting pregnant before the age of 21). BUT I have long beleived that the AA community and leaders are not dealing from the top of the deck regarding advice on establishing stable families and communities. Jesse Jackson's behavior of the last four years is Exhibit A. And he and the mother of his latest child are far older than 21!
We need to be willing to face up to our own complicity in weakening our communities: e.g. not providing practical and sound advice about birth control to youth; fostoring a climate of sexual recklessness ("Do it till you're satisfied!"), buying into the politics of victimization, and other bad missteps.
Peace!
|
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 01:22 pm: |
|
Troy:
I hate posting twice in a row but this guy gets me so steamed I want to spit!
What textbooks has Sowell written on Economics? What prizes has he won? What definitive treatises has he come up with?
How does he measure up against WEB DuBois, who wrote landmark books wherein he used painstaking research methods to bolster his conclusions, this guy, who, in everything I ever read bolsters his conclusions with more than anecdotes and half-baked popular notions. How does he measure up against Cornel West, who is a fraud but is at least brilliant, entertaining, knowlegeable and erudite (and quite unaware that he is a fraud making him at least an honest one) He's as bad as Shockley--the physicist who became a geneticist all the sudden. He is an academic gun for hire to the know-nothings and radical right. Heis a lickspittle and a milksop. He ain't qualified, and he shouldn't be representing the colored folks!
Please, please point me to something he has written or done that refutes this. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 05:59 pm: |
|
Chris, I find it interesting that you would refer to Cornel West as a fraud. I've always secretly thought that West was overrated, and that he'd bamboozled white academia into thinking that he is a super intellect. He does dazzle with the verbal acrobatics that leave his listeners up in the air, but he's really more about "style" than about "substance". |
Carey
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 07:18 pm: |
|
Hello Judy
Let me see if I'm reading you correctly. Do you have Johnny Cash and/or Porter Wagonner in your collection. I'm asking because let's be real, I question your statement concerning your dislike of "todays black music" implying that if it wasn't for this state of todays music you wouldn't be listening to Johnny and the boys. I don't know of anyone who "ran" to country and western because our music had lost it's appeal. I believe you listen to country and western because you LIKE country and western. Although I admit that there is a large selection of our music that might not be suitable but there is, and will always be enough of other selections that are pleasant and enjoyable. Come on now, let's keep it real, don't blame the music. |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 09:48 pm: |
|
I don't know if i'd call cw a fraud, but he does have credibility in philosophy...
judy:
We should accept our complicity, but shouldn't we demand the government to give all citizens the same resources? And if the state is treating us unjustly shouldn't we tell them that they're unjust? Can't we make both points? A self criticism and a external criticism ? aren't both postions valid and interdependent? |
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 11:17 pm: |
|
Who let these country music lovers into this thread anyway (smile).
Yukio
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the racism tip.
Final question on the subject: If you could control two things; (1) decreasing racism (actual not perceived), or (2) increasing an individuals effort, which would you choose to change in order to improve that individuals potential of success in the US today?
I guess you know, I would take may chances keeping the level of rascim where it is and work a little bit harder. Because you know what if you removed rascim altogether individuals still gotta work, at least until the amass enough wealth where they don’t have to work.
Cynique
"to graduate from high school, and to not get pregnant before the age of 21."
You would think this would be obvious. Teen pregnancy, particularly if the mother is poor, is tantamount to locking the door of success and throwing away the key. For both the mother and often their off spring -- As if it was not already hard enough in this world.
To make matter worse here in NY high schools provide often provide on site day care for teens with babies. To some this sounds like a wonderful thing – helping these teenage moms. Unfortunately we’ve made so many accommodations for teenage parents that we eliminated the disincentive for teenagers to become pregnant. Heck it is damn near encouraged. The “good” girls can’t have music, a decent sports program, or even decent text books in schools because a disproportional amount of limited resources are shunted to individuals less likely to benefit from them.
While this specific example is my own, it demonstrates a recurring theme in Sowell’s writings and that is: well meaning people (often white) spend a tremendous amount of our money on ideas and dreams which make them feel good, because they think they are helping black people when in fact just the opposite is true. The same goes for people like Jackson, where the incentive may be self enrichment.
Chris
Visit http://authors.aalbc.com/thomas.htm and buy the book “The Quest for Cosmic Justice “ if you don’t think the arguments are sufficiently supported, or just plain wrong mail it to me and I’ll personally refund your money. If you are looking for Sowell to win an NAACP image award you can forget it. Sowell actual wrote a very well received book on economics, "Basic Eccomics" he is known for taking complex topics and explaining them in terms the average person and understand.
You better not let Jackson hear you guys saying West is a fraud. He’ll try to get me to delete the posts and try to cut all my financial support. Shoot, West could not even make a good rap CD.
I beginning to think Harvard is over rated anyway. Many of our great leaders came from institutions like Morehouse College anyway. There is no reason HBCU’s should not be the amoung the finest instutions on the palent today. While wealthy (mostly while) people with legacy connections of average intelligence can get into the harvards. The typically only the smartest hardest working Brothers get into Harvard. (humm yukio is the rascim at work). Or is it rasim that syphoned most of out black talent from the Spellman’s to the Yales. As far as I’m concerned if Gates, West, and even Sowell for that matter, were really THAT concerned about black people they would actually be working with us and in our institutions. (Actually I seem to recall Sowell taught at Howard, but was disllusioned as professors there acepted mediocity from their students - don't quote me though) I ain’t hating them though, a good income and a comfortable life style is a wonderful thing (I’m trying to obtain/maintain that myself). The difference between West and Sowell is that I think Sowell is more intellicually honest with black people.
I gotta go wirte a newsletter tonight, Peace |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2003 - 09:30 am: |
|
Troy,
You question is unacceptable! Thats is the point i'm trying to make there is no either/or! Both pursuits valid simultaneously, and choosing only one is dangerous!
If you get rid of racism, but your individual spirit is weak then you'll remain spirtually empty ( i think laziness has to do with self-love and personal integrity).
If you "work hard" and do "what you're suppose to do," but you have no sense of your place and relationship to the world then there is a blindness and isolation...an unhealthy individualism at work.
Troy, i think both routes are mandatory. I also know that social hierarchies are in all societies, which means you'll have some oprahs, ph.ds, ups men and women, h. s. teachers, sanitation workers, fast food restaurant workers, people on welfare. That is a fact of life, so one has to do these jobs which have different societal values. Within all of these occupations, all of the individuals will and must work their ass off, whether it's intellectual work or physical exertion.
I think our politics are different and i may be a bit romantic about things.
Your response to Cynique is an example.
I agree with you that teenage pregnancy should be curtailed, but once it happens i think those with the greater need sould receive the resources, since resources are limited. I say ask for more resources from the state for more money for programs and new books.
Who has greater need? Are you suggesting that we tell these women with children, "Sorry... You should have been responsible and kept your legs closed. See ya when i see ya....good bye!"
ALso, i'm not concerned about liberals and what they or blacks folk think. At the end of the day, black people are not in power and so regardless of where we get the money, we will not have control over how its is used!!!!
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2003 - 11:28 am: |
|
Yukio, I contend that once grants and funds are received, black people do have power over how they are used, and too often this money does not trickle down to the most needy, but ends up lining the pockets of those in charge. And from what I can deduce, you are in favor of helping the needy by rewarding them for the repetitive irresponsible choices that caused them to be needy in the first place. I know I sound unsympathetic, but teen-age pregnancy, which is at the root of the problem, has become a status symbol among its peer group, and one way to discourage it, is to make it inconvenient. Yes, many of your arguments do carry weight, but they are based on unrealistic expectations in a cruel imperfect world. So,out of necessity, idealism has to be replaced by pragmatism. |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2003 - 05:10 pm: |
|
Cynique and others in fraternity:
1.Your contension is right on the money! NO argument here. Black people are greedy as all people are; I make no assumption that one's phenotype/melanin is going to tell me their poltics.
"And from what I can deduce, you are in favor of helping the needy by rewarding them for the repetitive irresponsible choices that caused them to be needy in the first place."
NO, i'm not in favoring of rewarding anyone. It is not a question of reward or punish. I do believe however that if pregnant then its your fault! Of course. But if we're talking about the distribution of public resources in public schools, such as Troy's example. Then i do believe that the woman with child should receive the resources. There is no right or wrong here. It is the states responsiblity, since the great depression(1929-39), to help those in need. You're right; People should be responsible for their actions. Troy's example was of women in the process of completing their education, not women who've dropped out but women still working on that second gone of getting their h.s. diploma. i believe that since resources are scarce then those who are most needy should receive the resources. I thought that was quite practical. I'm not affirming or supporting teen pregnancy. I believe that i can not affirm teen pregnancy and argue that these women should get help, since the childless women don't have a mouth to feed and are more likely to have a greater chance and opportuntities since they are childless.
I'm not sure if i've stated what my expectations are, but i'm clear that the world is imperfect and that people need to change themselves(not getting pregnant, getting good grades, live a virtuous life, etc..) and people have to change the world(questioning Bush's desire to go to war, fight poverty, racism, sexism, homosexuality, etc...). From the very beginning i've tried to state both positions. Also,as you said concerning yourself and i agreed with you, i'm conservative on some issues, liberal on others, and radical on others...I'm definitely not idealistic, maybe romantic but not idealistic.
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2003 - 10:29 pm: |
|
Yukio, I always find what you have to say interesting, informative, and thought-provoking. I enjoy exchanging views and reaching a common ground with you! Love ya!
"Cynique"
|
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2003 - 10:36 pm: |
|
Cynique,
I feel the same about you too! Common ground! Oh what a beautiful thing! That is unheard of here, it seems. I'm glad that we can do that and share.
Love ya too,
Yukio |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, February 07, 2003 - 01:39 pm: |
|
Don't Thomas look like that ventriloquist's dummy--who was that, Richard and Willie and the SLA? (I really should lighten up on the brotha, I know. He's just tryin' to make some bread. He just gets me so STEAMED.
Stanley Crouch used to--his columns usually try to have it both ways--but he seems like a decent sort, just weird. This guy has issues. |
Troy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, February 07, 2003 - 09:02 pm: |
|
Cynique I agree with your post (February 06, 2003 - 11:28 am) almost 100% percent, you were actully sounding like (dare I say it) like T. Sowell. Chris I hope Cynique does not get you steamed.
How many examples do we have of rewarding people for irresponsible behavior. If a kid flunks a course in NYC. The Board of Ed here will provide, night school, summer school, School after school, many opportunities to retake a course. As a result, failing a class reaps less of s consequences because there are many opportunities to make it up. One might agrue that we are providing more opportunities for success. I suggest that we are reducing the consequences of failing a course.
This saps a tremndous amount of financial resources providing education in the fashion -- get rid of all the PM, summer and night classes and you could probably afford to double the teachers salaries -- which are simply to low to attract the best teachers.
Similliarly someone had the bright idea that it is a good thing to mix student of varying abilities in the same classes; rather than group them based upon ability. The rationale was the brighter kids would help the slower kids do better. Ask any teacher how this works in practice and the vast majority will say it is a horrendous idea.
It only takes a 1 or 2 bad kids to disrupt the learning process. The slower kids demand more resource from the teacher and the bright kids suffer. Those bright kids are typically our kids.
So when the Board of Ed in NY with a budget of $12.36 Billion claims that is not enough it is hard tough to be simpathetic when you see so much waste and corruption...
...wait a minute I'm on a soap box. We are supposed to be discussing books...
I guess we are done with Sowell, except for when Chris comes back and tells us how much he appreicates Sowells insight after expanding his exposure beyond the Sowell's editorials.
OK, this month we will be discussing Walter Mosley's What Next: A Memoir Toward World Peace. Actually let me start a new Thread...
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 01:19 pm: |
|
Troy, it's really great when you take time away from your busy schedule and add your voice to our lively discussions! Especially when what you have to say is worth reading. Yeah, in some areas I am in agreement with Thomas Sowell but I am sure he and I would be totally opposed when it comes to waging war against Iraq. I know he wouldn't agree when I say that "might makes right" is the only justification for America's plan to invade Iraq. And in his fervor to placate the chicken hawks, Bush has succeeded in demonizing Sadam Hussein in order to cast America as the good guys who have God on their side. But Hussein's greatest sin is his egomania because, according to Amnesty International, as dictators go, Sadam is no worse than all the rest of them out there, some of whom America supports because it's in their best interest to do so. And, as others have pointed out, if Sadam is such a threat, why haven't his neighbors taken him out? He is surrounded by countries who, if allied, could crush him. Sorry Colin. Sorry Condolezza. You are, indeed, doing your master's bidding when you seek to ennoble this war. It's all about America's thrust to control the oil fields and dominate the world. BTW, Troy, I am really in sync with you when you say you had no problem with Octavia Butler offering no explanation as to how time travel was accomplished in "The Kindred" because this allowed her readers to use their imagination! |
|
Email This Page