WHAT ABOUT BLACK ON BLACK CRIME: ...How the myth was born
Options
playmaker88
Members Posts: 67,905 ✭✭✭✭✭
https://www.salon.com/2017/10/31/how-millions-of-white-americans-bought-into-a-racist-myth/
This article is a comprehensive run down on the creation and dissemination of the oft used phrase BLACK ON BLACK CRIME. Its a pretty long read, that draws everything together and puts it int historical/political/social context. i copy and pasted a few paragraphs so you can get the gist
This article is a comprehensive run down on the creation and dissemination of the oft used phrase BLACK ON BLACK CRIME. Its a pretty long read, that draws everything together and puts it int historical/political/social context. i copy and pasted a few paragraphs so you can get the gist
This argument is a lie decades in the making.
Statistical data collected by the FBI in 2016 reported that 90.1 percent of black homicide victims were killed by black perpetrators. Similarly, 83.5 percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites, a figure comparable to that for black victims. And yet the term “white-on-white crime” does not exist in American lexicon. According to Columbia University professor Carla Shedd, “All violence and crime is about proximity” to the point that the label “‘black-on-black crime’ is an unnecessary specification.” Furthermore, the extent to which black individuals are committing crime has been vastly exaggerated in the public imagination. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics maintains that less than one percent of all black Americans commit a violent crime in any given year, which, stated differently, means that 99 percent of black Americans do not commit crimes to contribute to the black-on-black crime categorization.
Crime was on the upswing in the 1980s. Mainstream news sources like the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post treated violent crimes in the city like spectacles, covering the goriest details with specificity and frequency that created a national panic over crime and the black Americans that seemed to be at the center of it. Thus, black-on-black crime emerged as a racialized means of understanding this wave of violence and its confluence with continued urban decline. Not only had they placed a major burden on the resources of struggling cities with their dependency, they were making those same cities hotbeds of violent crime. Both lent further credence to the idea that there was something wrong with black communities. According to conservative St. Louis planner Joe Plann, the city’s deterioration in the 1980s, not unlike that of many others, was due to the fact that “kids became more unstable and started this ‘black-on-black violence’ stuff”.
Construction of the black-on-black crime myth began as federal housing programs stimulated homeownership for whites in suburbia and conspired with real estate developers to discourage such ownership for blacks. In 1950, the National Association of Real Estate Boards maintained that “a Realtor should never be instrumental in introducing into a neighborhood… any race, or nationality, or individuals whose presence will clearly be detrimental to property values.” Inspired by the efforts begun by the Federal Housing Administration, which created maps to indicate which areas were right (read: white) for investment for use by banks and private lenders, the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation further entrenched discriminatory redlining as public policy, offering loans on a selective basis and insuring only those properties that agreed to restrictive covenants.
Chicago provides a particularly insightful case study into the depths to which state-sanctioned discrimination confined black Americans to concentrated poverty. Thanks to the city’s enthusiasm for restrictive covenants, nearly half of all residential neighborhoods in Chicago were inaccessible to black families by the 1940s. After the power to enforce restrictive covenants was compromised, Chicago relied on public housing to keep black communities in check. Between 1950 and the mid-1960s almost all (98 percent) of the public housing complexes built in Chicago were constructed in black neighborhoods.
Comments
-
Thanks for the insight. I would like for people to simplify this ? though. The American govt. has been at the forefront of demonizing and criminalizing Blacks. From slavery, to slave holding presidents to "Birth Of A Nation" premier in the white house. How fitting, right?
To find truth in statistical data provided by the govt is, absolutely ignorant and misguided. -
But people cant get an idea of how deep and interwoven this ? is by telling them.. a quick blurb meant for twitter im all for simplicity but not watering things down its all about understanding and this written piece is equivalent to the 13th by ava
-
My grandpa used to tell me bout the covenants in Petworth, DC and how he was one of the first black ppl to move in that neighborhood, which eventually became all black...but is now one of the most sought-after communities in this new, gentrified city
-
playmaker88 wrote: »But people cant get an idea of how deep and interwoven this ? is by telling them.. a quick blurb meant for twitter im all for simplicity but not watering things down its all about understanding and this written piece is equivalent to the 13th by ava
I don't disagree. I just tend to believe that people that need to go deeper, need more evidence etc. are people who support white supremacy and have no desire to accept truth.
There are actually people (majority white of course) who totally dismissed the 13th as once again Blacks making ? up. White's don't respect or care for Black Academia so, us presenting facts, stats etc means nothing to them.
Analyzing the crimes rates between Black and white tells us whites are ? delusional. You would think whites mentioning "Black on Black crime" would have a case if white on white crime was 2%, 5%, hell even 15%. But 83%? Umm that not any better. If, "Black on Black crime is a thing so, is white on white crime. -
The rate of homicide is a real concern, the term is stupid because people murder in their communities
-
Im not a big into stats my self. im talking about the meat of the whole article.. i mean lets not act like all black people know or care either sadly.. im not talkin about those who have a hire status... or those that are "woke" (hate buzzwords) im talkin about people who are just outside of the periphery or among the ? .. Fact is alot of people just dont understand or know the why and how.
-
It's pretty much a case where every negative connotation black people are the face of it. They've done a good job conditioning us to the point where some black people believe it themselves.
-
yellowtapesport wrote: »My grandpa used to tell me bout the covenants in Petworth, DC and how he was one of the first black ppl to move in that neighborhood, which eventually became all black...but is now one of the most sought-after communities in this new, gentrified city
kinda like the hamptons.
it was once all black as well -
playmaker88 wrote: »Im not a big into stats my self. im talking about the meat of the whole article.. i mean lets not act like all black people know or care either sadly.. im not talkin about those who have a hire status... or those that are "woke" (hate buzzwords) im talkin about people who are just outside of the periphery or among the ? .. Fact is alot of people just dont understand or know the why and how.
This is definitely but also unfortunately true.
A guy that I work with, we often have sociopolitical conversations but it damn near always comes back to "black on black" crime.
He doesn't understand or maybe doesn't want to understand that something like police brutality and the murder rate aren't directly correlated so they shouldn't ever be mentioned together. One doesn't impact the other, not in the general sense. The media tries to group them together to trivialize the argument.
He harbors some of the same thoughts as a lot of these white folks. "How can we worry about police injustice when we out here killing each other?"
Because they aren't the ? same. Yes we need to stop killing each other, without a doubt! But we can also address the systematic injustice or whatever the case might be without linking those two very distinct problems together. -
Breezy_Kilroy wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »Im not a big into stats my self. im talking about the meat of the whole article.. i mean lets not act like all black people know or care either sadly.. im not talkin about those who have a hire status... or those that are "woke" (hate buzzwords) im talkin about people who are just outside of the periphery or among the ? .. Fact is alot of people just dont understand or know the why and how.
This is definitely but also unfortunately true.
A guy that I work with, we often have sociopolitical conversations but it damn near always comes back to "black on black" crime.
He doesn't understand or maybe doesn't want to understand that something like police brutality and the murder rate aren't directly correlated so they shouldn't ever be mentioned together. One doesn't impact the other, not in the general sense. The media tries to group them together to trivialize the argument.
He harbors some of the same thoughts as a lot of these white folks. "How can we worry about police injustice when we out here killing each other?"
Because they aren't the ? same. Yes we need to stop killing each other, without a doubt! But we can also address the systematic injustice or whatever the case might be without linking those two very distinct problems together.
Do you think presenting him with this data or data displaying the amount of work Blacks are doing in their communities would change his opinion or stance?
-
Breezy_Kilroy wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »Im not a big into stats my self. im talking about the meat of the whole article.. i mean lets not act like all black people know or care either sadly.. im not talkin about those who have a hire status... or those that are "woke" (hate buzzwords) im talkin about people who are just outside of the periphery or among the ? .. Fact is alot of people just dont understand or know the why and how.
This is definitely but also unfortunately true.
A guy that I work with, we often have sociopolitical conversations but it damn near always comes back to "black on black" crime.
He doesn't understand or maybe doesn't want to understand that something like police brutality and the murder rate aren't directly correlated so they shouldn't ever be mentioned together. One doesn't impact the other, not in the general sense. The media tries to group them together to trivialize the argument.
He harbors some of the same thoughts as a lot of these white folks. "How can we worry about police injustice when we out here killing each other?"
Because they aren't the ? same. Yes we need to stop killing each other, without a doubt! But we can also address the systematic injustice or whatever the case might be without linking those two very distinct problems together.
Do you think presenting him with this data or data displaying the amount of work Blacks are doing in their communities would change his opinion or stance?
It's unlikely. I've never showed him anything tangible but I have facts for days and it doesn't seem to register.
This seems to be something engrained into his psyche that the black community is ? up and no one is trying to help.
I try to chip away. Some things get through others don't especially when it pertains to black issues.
If it's not on the news then that means it didn't happen. I think the reason for that is because the numbers and the community efforts aren't heavily reported. He'll believe the news before anything else because that's where he gets all his info from. -
I will read the whole thing at some later date, but did not like some of what I read.
Even if 90 percent of black homicide victims were killed by other blacks, and 83.5 percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites, the black homicide rate might still be considerably higher than the white one. Hell, the same thing could be true even if, say, 70 percent of black homicide victims were killed by other blacks, and a much higher percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites.
Does the author not realize this? Either way, this is an obviously bad argument. I have seen other people make it as well. We can do better than to use it. -
What's the point of stating all of this?
-
Undefeatable wrote: »I will read the whole thing at some later date, but did not like some of what I read.
Even if 90 percent of black homicide victims were killed by other blacks, and 83.5 percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites, the black homicide rate might still be considerably higher than the white one. Hell, the same thing could be true even if, say, 70 percent of black homicide victims were killed by other blacks, and a much higher percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites.
Does the author not realize this? Either way, this is an obviously bad argument. I have seen other people make it as well. We can do better than to use it.
black -13%
white- 70%
1 black killing 3 has a higher percentage of a white killing 3 -
Thanks for the insight. I would like for people to simplify this ? though. The American govt. has been at the forefront of demonizing and criminalizing Blacks. From slavery, to slave holding presidents to "Birth Of A Nation" premier in the white house. How fitting, right?
To find truth in statistical data provided by the govt is, absolutely ignorant and misguided.
Data is just collected information. There isn't anything intrinsically wrong with the data the government provides. It's the interpretation that is important. The thing is, when you look at it, most government data actually invalidates a lot of the ? used to demonize black people. For example, remember the absent father stereotype that all the CaCs were using to bash black men a couple years ago. It was federal data (from the CDC specifically) that put that ? to rest by actually showing that black men, whether in the house or not, were among the most active in their children's lives.
But you don't need to get any simpler than the first quote in the OP.Statistical data collected by the FBI in 2016 reported that 90.1 percent of black homicide victims were killed by black perpetrators. Similarly, 83.5 percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites, a figure comparable to that for black victims. And yet the term “white-on-white crime” does not exist in American lexicon. According to Columbia University professor Carla Shedd, “All violence and crime is about proximity” to the point that the label “‘black-on-black crime’ is an unnecessary specification.” Furthermore, the extent to which black individuals are committing crime has been vastly exaggerated in the public imagination. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics maintains that less than one percent of all black Americans commit a violent crime in any given year, which, stated differently, means that 99 percent of black Americans do not commit crimes to contribute to the black-on-black crime categorization.
This is all that needs to be said. The media and racists try to paint blacks as violent savages and the common perception, whether people admit it or not, is that a large number of people within the black community are violent. This shows that's clearly not the case, so non-blacks are basically being led to judge the whole black community by 1%. That's crazy. -
-
Stats are like .2% of the article
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Thanks for the insight. I would like for people to simplify this ? though. The American govt. has been at the forefront of demonizing and criminalizing Blacks. From slavery, to slave holding presidents to "Birth Of A Nation" premier in the white house. How fitting, right?
To find truth in statistical data provided by the govt is, absolutely ignorant and misguided.
Data is just collected information. There isn't anything intrinsically wrong with the data the government provides. It's the interpretation that is important. The thing is, when you look at it, most government data actually invalidates a lot of the ? used to demonize black people. For example, remember the absent father stereotype that all the CaCs were using to bash black men a couple years ago. It was federal data (from the CDC specifically) that put that ? to rest by actually showing that black men, whether in the house or not, were among the most active in their children's lives.
But you don't need to get any simpler than the first quote in the OP.Statistical data collected by the FBI in 2016 reported that 90.1 percent of black homicide victims were killed by black perpetrators. Similarly, 83.5 percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites, a figure comparable to that for black victims. And yet the term “white-on-white crime” does not exist in American lexicon. According to Columbia University professor Carla Shedd, “All violence and crime is about proximity” to the point that the label “‘black-on-black crime’ is an unnecessary specification.” Furthermore, the extent to which black individuals are committing crime has been vastly exaggerated in the public imagination. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics maintains that less than one percent of all black Americans commit a violent crime in any given year, which, stated differently, means that 99 percent of black Americans do not commit crimes to contribute to the black-on-black crime categorization.
This is all that needs to be said. The media and racists try to paint blacks as violent savages and the common perception, whether people admit it or not, is that a large number of people within the black community are violent. This shows that's clearly not the case, so non-blacks are basically being led to judge the whole black community by 1%. That's crazy.
I disagree. I believe the govt. data is racially biased therefore it's wrong. There's just to many instances (hundreds of years worth) of govt backed policy\laws and propaganda to make me believe otherwise.
That was a great example you provided. But again I didn't need that article and data to confirm what I and many others already knew about Black fathers and their children. Polar bear validation isn't needed. ? what they "think" because even when provided with the truth polar bears will still side with their political parties and their ? up beliefs about people of color. Notice how that govt data changed nothing. Black fathers are still the scourge of the earth in the eyes of wasichu. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Thanks for the insight. I would like for people to simplify this ? though. The American govt. has been at the forefront of demonizing and criminalizing Blacks. From slavery, to slave holding presidents to "Birth Of A Nation" premier in the white house. How fitting, right?
To find truth in statistical data provided by the govt is, absolutely ignorant and misguided.
Data is just collected information. There isn't anything intrinsically wrong with the data the government provides. It's the interpretation that is important. The thing is, when you look at it, most government data actually invalidates a lot of the ? used to demonize black people. For example, remember the absent father stereotype that all the CaCs were using to bash black men a couple years ago. It was federal data (from the CDC specifically) that put that ? to rest by actually showing that black men, whether in the house or not, were among the most active in their children's lives.
But you don't need to get any simpler than the first quote in the OP.Statistical data collected by the FBI in 2016 reported that 90.1 percent of black homicide victims were killed by black perpetrators. Similarly, 83.5 percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites, a figure comparable to that for black victims. And yet the term “white-on-white crime” does not exist in American lexicon. According to Columbia University professor Carla Shedd, “All violence and crime is about proximity” to the point that the label “‘black-on-black crime’ is an unnecessary specification.” Furthermore, the extent to which black individuals are committing crime has been vastly exaggerated in the public imagination. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics maintains that less than one percent of all black Americans commit a violent crime in any given year, which, stated differently, means that 99 percent of black Americans do not commit crimes to contribute to the black-on-black crime categorization.
This is all that needs to be said. The media and racists try to paint blacks as violent savages and the common perception, whether people admit it or not, is that a large number of people within the black community are violent. This shows that's clearly not the case, so non-blacks are basically being led to judge the whole black community by 1%. That's crazy.
I disagree. I believe the govt. data is racially biased therefore it's wrong. There's just to many instances (hundreds of years worth) of govt backed policy\laws and propaganda to make me believe otherwise.
That was a great example you provided. But again I didn't need that article and data to confirm what I and many others already knew about Black fathers and their children. Polar bear validation isn't needed. ? what they "think" because even when provided with the truth polar bears will still side with their political parties and their ? up beliefs about people of color. Notice how that govt data changed nothing. Black fathers are still the scourge of the earth in the eyes of wasichu.
I'd agree if we're talking about police statistics because we know much of that is generated from racist police work. So really you just have to check the source. I'd disagree that the CDC data didn't do anything though. FOXNews and their ilk don't invoke that deadbeat dad ? as much. Let's be real, for a while, deadbeat dads was what "black on black crime" is now. When the CDC data came up and people started throwing that ? out there every time that deadbeat dad ? was used, they moved on to something else.
Also, before you dismiss government data, remember the Federal government is one of the few entities in this country that actually enforces affirmative action quotas. What that means is that you'll typically find a larger percentage of blacks working in Federal offices. In other words, you're dismissing the data as white validation, when the truth is a lot of these insights have probably come, in part, from work done by black people. There's also the point that this helps us in the fact that sometimes we fall for the tricks too. I wouldn't have guessed that only ~1% of blacks participate in violent crime. I knew it was a low percentage, but I didn't think it was that low. Any of us can be influenced by ? when we hear it enough, so it's good to get a reality check every now and then. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »Thanks for the insight. I would like for people to simplify this ? though. The American govt. has been at the forefront of demonizing and criminalizing Blacks. From slavery, to slave holding presidents to "Birth Of A Nation" premier in the white house. How fitting, right?
To find truth in statistical data provided by the govt is, absolutely ignorant and misguided.
Data is just collected information. There isn't anything intrinsically wrong with the data the government provides. It's the interpretation that is important. The thing is, when you look at it, most government data actually invalidates a lot of the ? used to demonize black people. For example, remember the absent father stereotype that all the CaCs were using to bash black men a couple years ago. It was federal data (from the CDC specifically) that put that ? to rest by actually showing that black men, whether in the house or not, were among the most active in their children's lives.
But you don't need to get any simpler than the first quote in the OP.Statistical data collected by the FBI in 2016 reported that 90.1 percent of black homicide victims were killed by black perpetrators. Similarly, 83.5 percent of white homicide victims were killed by other whites, a figure comparable to that for black victims. And yet the term “white-on-white crime” does not exist in American lexicon. According to Columbia University professor Carla Shedd, “All violence and crime is about proximity” to the point that the label “‘black-on-black crime’ is an unnecessary specification.” Furthermore, the extent to which black individuals are committing crime has been vastly exaggerated in the public imagination. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics maintains that less than one percent of all black Americans commit a violent crime in any given year, which, stated differently, means that 99 percent of black Americans do not commit crimes to contribute to the black-on-black crime categorization.
This is all that needs to be said. The media and racists try to paint blacks as violent savages and the common perception, whether people admit it or not, is that a large number of people within the black community are violent. This shows that's clearly not the case, so non-blacks are basically being led to judge the whole black community by 1%. That's crazy.
I disagree. I believe the govt. data is racially biased therefore it's wrong. There's just to many instances (hundreds of years worth) of govt backed policy\laws and propaganda to make me believe otherwise.
That was a great example you provided. But again I didn't need that article and data to confirm what I and many others already knew about Black fathers and their children. Polar bear validation isn't needed. ? what they "think" because even when provided with the truth polar bears will still side with their political parties and their ? up beliefs about people of color. Notice how that govt data changed nothing. Black fathers are still the scourge of the earth in the eyes of wasichu.
I'd agree if we're talking about police statistics because we know much of that is generated from racist police work. So really you just have to check the source. I'd disagree that the CDC data didn't do anything though. FOXNews and their ilk don't invoke that deadbeat dad ? as much. Let's be real, for a while, deadbeat dads was what "black on black crime" is now. When the CDC data came up and people started throwing that ? out there every time that deadbeat dad ? was used, they moved on to something else.
Also, before you dismiss government data, remember the Federal government is one of the few entities in this country that actually enforces affirmative action quotas. What that means is that you'll typically find a larger percentage of blacks working in Federal offices. In other words, you're dismissing the data as white validation, when the truth is a lot of these insights have probably come, in part, from work done by black people. There's also the point that this helps us in the fact that sometimes we fall for the tricks too. I wouldn't have guessed that only ~1% of blacks participate in violent crime. I knew it was a low percentage, but I didn't think it was that low. Any of us can be influenced by ? when we hear it enough, so it's good to get a reality check every now and then.
I am just going to continue disagreeing even though your argument is compelling. I side with history both past and present. Be it local or federal govt. neither has been a friend to Blacks in treatment or the portrayal of us as a people and culture.
As it pertains to Blacks I don't need Govt. stats, when I have lived and breathed Black my entire life. The notion that Blacks are somehow aliens, criminals and do more evil then whites is absurd on face value. Humans, have been, and always will be human. No race is immune from fuckshit of all sorts. No shots at all being taken here just speaking bluntly with a hint of frustration. Anyone needing stats to tell them that is an imbecile. -
I am just going to continue disagreeing even though your argument is compelling. I side with history both past and present. Be it local or federal govt. neither has been a friend to Blacks in treatment or the portrayal of us as a people and culture.
As it pertains to Blacks I don't need Govt. stats, when I have lived and breathed Black my entire life. The notion that Blacks are somehow aliens, criminals and do more evil then whites is absurd on face value. Humans, have been, and always will be human. No race is immune from fuckshit of all sorts. No shots at all being taken here just speaking bluntly with a hint of frustration. Anyone needing stats to tell them that is an imbecile.
I feel what you're saying, but ? like this isn't important because it clues us in on the truth. It's important because it can open the eyes of other people. I know it's the popular thing to think that all nonblacks are just evil racists, but ? really isn't that simple. A lot of people believe what they believe because they were led to believe it. If there is a lie in place. It's good to tear down that lie. Some ? will still continue to believe the lie, but there are always people walk away from it and choose to embrace truth. Misinformation has damaged our community. We can't hope to repair that damage without first dispelling the misinformation. -
playmaker88 wrote: »
Pastor tells congregation ? exist -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »
Data is just collected information. There isn't anything intrinsically wrong with the data the government provides. It's the interpretation that is important.
right
same as the government isn't intrinsically this evil institution.... it depends on who is in office and its citizens
back in 2013 a federal judge rejected new york's stop and frisk policy after data collected strongly suggested officers were conducting stops in a racially discriminatory manner
and called for a federal monitor to oversee broad reforms, including the use of body-worn cameras for some patrol officers
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-practice-violated-rights-judge-rules.html
we already knew the ? but it's important ...if it don't lead to reform today...and can lead to reform in the future...if it causes one person to question their views that's a win
have to remember to double check the sources as well... which i'm still learning
-
playmaker88 wrote: »
Pastor tells congregation ? exist
Thats being dense..
Someone tells you something even if you know of it.. and it goes into detail about ? you might just know on a cursory level.. you dismiss it... that says alot about you and whom ever else subscribes to this misguided line of thought -
playmaker88 wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »
Pastor tells congregation ? exist
Thats being dense..
Someone tells you something even if you know of it.. and it goes into detail about ? you might just know on a cursory level.. you dismiss it... that says alot about you and whom ever else subscribes to this misguided line of thought
^This. Add to that, a lot of the things people think they "know" often turn out to be untrue.
