Needless to say, the events that transpired in Charlottesville earlier this month and the President’s bizarre response to an episode that was far more “black and white” (pardon the pun) than his remarks let on, have inflamed racial tensions across the country.
Trump is right about one thing: anecdotally speaking, race relations were deteriorating prior to his presidency. Freddie Gray, Walter Scott, and Eric Garner are all names that are now associated with what many contend is an endemically racist system that systematically oppresses minorities as part of a desperate (and in some cases “unwitting”, because that’s what happens when something becomes endemic – otherwise decent people end up perpetuating it solely by virtue of its ubiquity) effort to preserve white privilege.
We’ve been steadfast in our defense of the notion that monuments to the Confederacy should be removed as should effigies of slaveowners no matter how instrumental they were in the nation’s founding. We also contend that the very people memorialized in the statues in question would support their removal and that assessment is backed up not only by the words of their ancestors, but by the historical record.
That said, it is almost undoubtedly true that most African Americans – let alone whites protesting on behalf of what they perceive to be African Americans’ collective wishes (and that in and of itself has an rather insidious paternalism baked into it) – didn’t care one way or another about those statues until this month.
But people who trot that out as “proof” that the sentiment is disingenuous are themselves being absurdly disingenuous.
Society is full of examples of things that probably should be abolished but are generally tolerated by the people they harm (psychologically or even physically). The reason for that apparent apathy is self-evident: lacking some catalyst that adds a sense of immediacy to the cause, people aren’t predisposed to act because for the vast majority of Americans, just making it through the week is a struggle that consumes nearly every waking hour. That’s especially true for minorities.
We know, for instance, that McDonald’s is bad for us. But up to and until the obesity epidemic finally reaches some kind of tipping point that catapults the issue to the forefront of the nation’s collective conscious, no one is going to take the day off from work to tear down golden arches (incidentally, the tipping point for the obesity issue is probably drawing nigh).
Well now that the tipping point for monuments to slavery is apparently upon us, do consider the following excerpts from Brookings’ summary of an NBER working paper called Up from slavery? African American intergenerational economic mobility since 1880.
The short passages and the accompanying visuals certainly seem to suggest that we do indeed have a problem in America. And while taking down a couple of statues isn’t going to solve it, leaving them up serves no discernible purpose whatsoever other than to pacify whites who refuse to accept the fact that it’s 2017….
Imputing income using individual characteristics, including occupation, region, and gender, Collins and Wanamaker find that black sons have historically been significantly less likely than their white peers from similar economic backgrounds to ascend the income ladder. Black sons were less likely than their white peers to enjoy higher-earning jobs than the ones their fathers had, so their incomes were lower. This mobility gap can be seen across the entire period. Even for the latest cohort (with earnings observed in 1990), they find a yawning gap in upward economic mobility between black and white sons from similar backgrounds–somewhat smaller than existed in 1900 or 1930, but still huge.
The chart below shows the proportion of sons rising at least 10 percentiles on the income distribution, compared to the position of their fathers, for each decile of father’s income (or mother, if she was the sole guardian). So in 1930, for example, white sons born in the 2nd decile had a 57 percent chance of being relatively upwardly mobile by 10 or more percentiles, while black sons had only about a 20 percent chance. By 1990, those numbers were about 80 percent and 45 percent.
Has it already been 150 years? Seems like it was just yesterday.
lol.
Instead of taking these statues down, lets ADD statues of slaves with iron neck-collars attached to chains held by the hands of the celebrated slave-masters. That, at least, would provide a more complete picture and serve as a reminders of what, in fact, is being celebrated.
I like that idea, though instead of ADDING statues, even better is REPLACING.
I would like to think the jerks who brandish their alt-right insignias and torches would be less proud to stand and chant their disgusting mantras for those statues!
– Murphy