Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00389)

--- In theos-talk@y..., "Steve Stubbs" <stevestubbs@y...> wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@y..., Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
> > While blacks are
> > represented disproportionately in jails, they are still very much 
> the
> > minority of the prison population. And only a small minority of 
> blacks
> > are in prison.
> 
> It was reported in the news one time that 25% of the black male 
> population is in prison or has been in prison at any one time. No 
> comment on whether this makes sense or not, but it is the position 
of 
> some black leaders that violence should be decriminalized as a form 
> of reverse discrimination. The implication is that the high rate 
of 
> incarceration is due to a cultural bias against violent subcultures 
> rather than to a legitimate social need. (I.e., some subcultyures 
> consider violence a good thing, but the law favors the Eurocentric 
> model.) I am not sure I agree, but a s a philosopher I believe 
ideas 
> which radically challenge commonly accepted prejudices have great 
> value in shaking us out of routine ways of thinking. I would 
> therefore encourage you to explore the pros and cons of that 
position 
> whether you ultimate accept it or not. One other idea that has 
been 
> floated which is less outrageous and has considerable merit is that 
> the congress, determing that blacks favor crack cocaine whereas 
their 
> sons and daughters favor the powdered form of the same drug, passed 
> Draconian laws against crack while leaving penalties for use or 
> possession of powdered cocaine relatively mild. Even the mild 
> penalties are of course not enforced if the offender is connected. 
> Look at the case of Winona Ryder, convicted of grand theft and free 
> to do as she pleases. A fellow was featured on 60 MINUTES a few 
> months ago who was not wealthy and who was sentenced to life for 
> stealing a jelly doughnut.

********************Part I

I am glad to see someone else discussing race besides myself. When I 
do I get called a nazi. But as one who is intimately involved with 
blacks who are at an impressionable age, by virtue of my profession, 
I see the violence that is a big part of their culture. As my brother 
would often describe his impression of blacks "they are very 
physical." I see the truth of that up close and personal every day. 
But is it criminal or a violent subculture as many whites 
characterize it?

But who am I talking about? I'm black, but we were not only never 
spanked or hit, but I had never seen people fight until I started 
teaching at an inner city school. Now, people think black culture is 
due to Colonialism, teenage motherhood, racism, slavery, poverty, low 
IQ, and a host of other things. But I say rubbish to all these 
reasons. Not because I did a thesis on this subject and spent some 
time thinking about it, NO. Because I forgot all about that stuff and 
went on with my life in a lily white world. Moving to Texas has 
changed that for me. I teach in a public inner city school. It was/is 
culture shock to me. I have never seen people act like this. It is 
almost shocking to me sometimes. Yet, I am black too. 

So, that's why I ask who the heck or what is blackness or black 
culture. I did not answer the question I posed above, but here is my 
answer which I have been cooking for a long time: what we see is what 
we get. The history that blacks have gone through has not made them 
different people. The forces of rebirth which have brought all the 
root races into black bodies and vice versa has created what we see. 
No one is exempt from having come through every race. But there is an 
essence in each race which is held, kept alive by certain people and 
they are the aboriginals, the essence, the source of a particular 
race. And no amount of killing, moving, hating or integrating will 
change the essence of a race.

Netemara
*********Part II*******
About why the rich are set free, and we don't protest, and the poor 
do time and we don't mind: 

I think the following opinion, I expressed on another forum in 
talking about the controversy of Kirpal Singh, is the crux of how 
Americans and others see 'crime' and 'criminals.'

(Edited from its original form)

We are emotionally tied to our sins and our sinners! Therefore, we do 
turn a blind eye to those who sin in our presence. This is why there 
are so many young women, to use an example that gets everyone's gall, 
who live with two parents and one of the parents, usually the father, 
is found to be molesting one or all of the children. Then you have 
the boys who claimed to have murdered the dad (whites) for this very 
reason. However, they had no mother at home. But in the cases where 
there is a mom she always pleads ignorance. What I think 
she is really pleading to in most cases is "tunnel vision." She don't 
see cause she don't wanna see. That is the emotional ties that bind. 

Look at the Catholic Church. Why? Because that is a classic slap on 
the limp wrist. And in this case the parishoners play the role of the 
deceived mom. And what the heck are they saying? They are saying "We 
loved that priest!" They say "he was handsome, or he was nice, or he 
was a great minister. We want him back!" 

I rest my case Judge forum. LOL

Netemara