My mom and I were having a discussion about the pledge that some candidates were signing, about to sign, etc. My mother got her information from some Black radio station that got it all wrong. She was loud, angry, and mad about something nobody ever wrote, pledged, or publicly said. I looked up the exact quote, read it to her. She was still undone.
"Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President."
It's never a good idea for anyone to seriously compare any condition to slavery in America. Never. Like, there could come a time when people with green eyes were brutally enslaved and it still wouldn't be cool to compare their plight to this country's history.
Had it been stated differently, the message would have come across differently--I think. Had they left slavery out and simply stated that the statistical decline of the traditional Black is at it's lowest point as we have an African American President, the people, the smart ones at least, could have focused on the meat of the message.
If we remove the instinctual emotional reaction to slavery, is it true? Were kids more likely to be in a two parent household during those years than now? Even as property, where any family member could be sold off at the master's will, were there still more traditional families? It's hard to imagine. And really, that's what people should be mad about. Where is the evidence to support the assertion? I wish someone had focused on forcing the R'pubs to provide evidence for their assertion. But naw. To me, this is where we always go wrong. We don't force them to prove what they're saying is a FACT and defend their so-called credibility!
Had it been stated differently, the message would have come across differently--I think. Had they left slavery out and simply stated that the statistical decline of the traditional Black is at it's lowest point as we have an African American President, the people, the smart ones at least, could have focused on the meat of the message.
If we remove the instinctual emotional reaction to slavery, is it true? Were kids more likely to be in a two parent household during those years than now? Even as property, where any family member could be sold off at the master's will, were there still more traditional families? It's hard to imagine. And really, that's what people should be mad about. Where is the evidence to support the assertion? I wish someone had focused on forcing the R'pubs to provide evidence for their assertion. But naw. To me, this is where we always go wrong. We don't force them to prove what they're saying is a FACT and defend their so-called credibility!
I believe the whole comment was wrong. As if there were real "two parent" families for slaves. Maybe they were referring to free Blacks. But we'll never know because we allow people to make these outrageous statements and just accept them as fact.
Posted by: slsonnier | 07/15/2011 at 08:34 AM
And this is my point. Aint nary so-called Black leader asked for the unbiased, reputable, evidence to support the statement. I seriously doubt any exists. They damned sure didn't do a sampling of property records! But we (Blacks) get deep in our feelings over the surface comparison when we should've have gone even harder of the root of the problem: R'pubs stay fabricating facts!
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Posted by: Ms. Smart | 07/15/2011 at 08:48 AM
You know Sam Jackson should respond to their claims w/ expletives and swear words and stuff. & is the sweed taiwaneese and american 2520 discussing the 1400s across the cube wall??? Knew I should have stood outside to hear fred hammond n em sing last night. *sigh*
I wish I had a sustainable lifestyle. *sigh some more*
& just thinking about it, the stats are secondarily speaking to the people's desire to war against something. Back in the day it was to war against nature. Now what? If that's the majority that's the majority. but what are the variables that contribute to that? Who are these people that are doing it? How can you create a control to accurately answer that second question?
check that self sustaining lifestyle.
Posted by: WuDaMan | 07/15/2011 at 10:11 AM
"R'pubs stay fabricating facts!"
And they will continue to do so as long as we continue to react the way we do - from an emotional place.
Posted by: SoJo | 07/15/2011 at 11:42 AM
So much about that statement angers me that it's hard to focus on a comment. I call BULL! There are no facts to back it up, President Obama has only been POTUS for 2 1/2 years so statistically that is impossible to compare 140 years ago to today. And what constitutes an AA family...one Black parent, 2 Black parents, one mixed-one not?? And in 1860 it was the first time that Slaves were actually counted by NAME on the US Census. Before that we were just Black male about so many years old, Black female so many years old, Black child xxxx. Family relations were not recorded.
Posted by: Onefromphilly | 07/15/2011 at 11:47 AM
Alright Now! Come on w/ the come on!
Posted by: WuDaMan | 07/15/2011 at 11:51 AM
Yes! Call them on it! Question their sources. I wish women's groups had questioned the source when it was stated that Planned Parenthood mostly provides abortion services!
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Posted by: Ms. Smart | 07/15/2011 at 11:51 AM
We all call bull. The thing is I call it from an emotionless, factual standpoint. Where is their documentation? Where is their Reference List? There is none.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Posted by: Ms. Smart | 07/15/2011 at 11:52 AM
I had the exact same problem with that quote. Slaves were property and could not be legally married, and families were frequently broken up at the auction block so I can't see how this could be factually true at all. Even if we give them benefit of the doubt, they can't prove it because the first census was conducted in 1790 and slaves weren't freed until 1863--and having gone through census archives for a project in undergrad, I know for a fact that nobody was recording slave household info in the census. And not enough slave owners kept detailed records for you to make the assertion based on that, either. GOP ain't about to fool THIS history/sociology major!
Posted by: Maybesomaybeno.wordpress.com | 07/15/2011 at 12:43 PM
You come though speaking more of the truth. And I find, in most areas, the emotional reaction is probably the one least likely to get to the bottom of the lies.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Posted by: Ms. Smart | 07/15/2011 at 01:34 PM