I belong to a local debate club. Members exchange views on various political and cultural topics, mostly online since Covid although we’ll be resuming in-person meetups this year. Below is a recent email exchange among a few of our members (myself not included).
Member 1: The fixation on racial parity at any cost will doom yet another generation to educational failure. "You don’t help underperforming groups by pandering to them or by holding them to lower standards. And you don’t help black children by insisting that they must be seated next to white children in order to learn. It’s not only insulting and condescending but contradicted by decades of evidence. Low-income black students need quality schools, not white classmates.” [Quote from Black Students Need Better Schools, Not Lower Standards/Wall Street Journal, February 7, 2023]
Member 2: I have to say, I am stunned to read an opinion piece like this in 2023! This author is basically arguing the side of Board of Education of Topeka, that their policy of "separate but equal" racial segregation of schools was constitutional. Unfortunately, SCOTUS disagreed in the landmark Brown versus Board of Education of Topeka. I am astonished that I even need to explain this, but the point is NOT that White kids should sit next to Black kids, but that Black kids should enjoy the same facilities and teaching resources that White kids enjoy. in 1954, SCOTUS ruled that keeping kids in separate schools inevitably resulted in unequal facilities for Black kids.
Now, 70 years later, we are again in a situation where Black kids go to separate schools, despite some efforts to bus them. Schools in Black neighborhoods are typically much poorer than those in White neighborhoods, and Black kids continue to suffer inferior facilities. Worse facilities contribute to poorer school performance.
As for lowering standards. This problem has nothing to do with race. American schools in general tend to underperform versus their European and Asian counterparts. This author is implying that standards at White schools are being lowered in order to accommodate Black students being bussed in. That's a false and problematic statement! The "war on standards" is an indirect swipe on liberal teaching methods, but in fact, liberal states make up 9 of the top 10 Most Educated States in the Country. The other state, Virginia is technically a swing-state, but the most educated part is likely the liberal area bordering Washington D.C.
Member 1: I agree with the author that busing is disrespectful and harmful to the very people that were to be helped. The Brown decision was correct in its intent, but wrong in its action.
Member 2: I don't see why busing is "disrespectful and harmful". Why is sitting next to White kids harmful to the Black kids? So sitting next to Asian or Latino kids is OK? C'mon, this whole line of reasoning is ridiculous!
I do have some knowledge of busing. A good friend of mine is an Art school teacher in San Carlos. Her school gets kids bussed in from East Palo Alto. The problem she finds with bussing is that the kids from the two areas don't tend to bond because they live physically too far apart. The bussed kids are heavily constrained by the school bus schedule and often don't participate in after-school programs. But she finds that the bussed kids benefit from the art supplies that her richer school provides. As far as performance goes, she finds the bussed kids are often behind initially, but catch up quickly as the year progresses.
As far as inner-city schools. Agreed they are terrible. I think violence is a big part of it, but you can't blame the kids for that. Bussing has drawbacks, but also a big plus as far as safety is concerned.
Member 3: What your assessments of Black privilege don't take into account is the generational trauma that has been passed down from the days of slavery, reinforced by all the years of mistreatment of Blacks since then.
Black humans developed ways to adapt to the hyperauthoritarianism of slavery that are dysfunctional today. They learned to suppress their forbidden emotions and unbearable memories through substance abuse, projecting feelings of vulnerability onto their children and punishing them for it, interracial discrimination and shaming, to name a few. The anxiety, irritability, fear and health problems that naturally accompany trauma unavoidably affect the next generation. The unique trauma of being harmed by fellow human beings causes shame and mistrust. This is not over. I see it every day in the friends and families of my godchildren.
These kids don't need separate but equal. They need emotional support. They need the best teachers, who are paid commensurately. They need access to help for emotional and learning problems. They need reliable structure. Most of all, they need safety. Their parents need much the same things.
Perhaps you yourself have also suffered from trauma, and don't understand why it should be different for Black kids or Black parents. Or maybe you haven't, and can't imagine what it feels like. I would ask that you offer respect and an attempt to understand, the things that are necessary for people to overcome shame and gain a sense of dignity.
Member 4: Slavery ended 150 years ago and there's no scientific evidence it gets "passed down". It's almost an article of religious faith that black people still struggle with the effects and likewise the mistreatment that clearly was a problem prior to the 1970s. Yet when looking for counter-examples based in psychological science, exactly the opposite effect is clear. Adversity results in stronger and more capable individuals, not privilege. Immigrants from Africa seeking asylum here to escape from horrible oppression and violence very often to better than the average American born with wealth. The data is pretty clear. https://news.ku.edu/2020/06/18/study-shows-african-immigrants-do-well-despite-differences-among-them
I'm also not sure black children are able to mentally inherit any trauma from their parents. It seems far more likely, and this is also far more visible to me, that what they are inheriting from parents is a severe disregard for authority combined with a glorification of crime and violence. You can see it in the music, the dress, the language, and the culture. I see entitlement everywhere, especially in law enforcement where a black suspect has a 4-fold higher chance to resist arrest and fight with the police as a white suspect and in some places like San Francisco this rate is higher by a factor of 8. (I'm not going to simply assume the narrative that all of this is discrimination, I've seen plenty of videos of black suspects screaming obscenities at police from the moment they are pulled over). https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/African-Americans-cited-for-resisting-arrest-at-6229946.php
What are the psychological effects of telling a child that he/she is a victim and those who are responsible for the victimization are walking around with power and privilege? I'm not a psychologist but I know the answer anyway because it's so obvious. Anger, resentment, and a desire for retribution. Yet our national direction in education is to teach children exactly this.
This is going to be devastating to the black community. A secondary result will be the inevitable backlash as other races, not just White but also Asian and Hispanic, start to grow tired of discrimination and the endless river of money being diverted to somehow even things up for past sins that no one alive is responsible for. I'm very open to considering alternative explanations and causes for this crisis but it needs to be a conversation, not a crushing dictate from the left that currently controls the media, academia, and most governments in large population centers. Things are getting worse and there needs to be an actual examination into why that is.
Member 3: None of what you’ve referenced contradicts anything I wrote or linked to. Do you honestly think that if your parents had been slaves you wouldn’t have been seriously affected? For the biological aspect, read the section on epigenetics in my 2nd link.
Member 4: As I said, the scientific evidence is that immigrants from much more violent and much more oppressive nations tend to do significantly better than Americans who have always lived here. Sometimes they come from nations that still have slavery even today. Adversity tends to make people stronger, not weaker, and maybe we need to take a good look at how easy life has gotten for those who are either criminals or refuse to work from any race.
Epigenetics affecting behavior is certainly possible but it should never be assumed. I find it hard to believe that something so vague and nonspecific as a biological transfer mechanism can have such a large effect while teaching children to be resentful and hate authority does very little. I find it much easier to believe that it's the opposite and modern policy to address inequity is making things much worse.
The last point I want to make is none of this is quantifiable. It's not even theory. It's a hypothesis with almost nothing tangible to address even if it was true. If it's not falsifiable, it's not science and can only be taken on faith.
Member 3: Okay, you keep your hypothesis based on random contextless observations, and I'll keep mine based on neurobiology, psychology, and relevant history. I do admire your capacity for self compassion. Some people meditate for years trying to achieve your level, lol.
Member 4: That's an odd thing to say to me after I've linked two peer reviewed studies backing up my assertions.
Self-compassion? Not one single sentence I typed here relates to my own situation or experience.
I'd like to hear the evidence you have from neurobiology and psychology that supports the assertion that a legacy of slavery resulted in negative effects in a population greatly favored by affirmative action, an endless river of public money, and an education on victim culture since the 1960s. MY experience with neurobiology and psychology is that it makes people resentful and lazy and gives them endless ways to rationalize away responsibility. I'm not saying anything radical here, you can find the same advice in a century's worth of child psychology books.
Member 3: Enjoy! [Preceded by seven links appearing to be articles and books regarding multigenerational trauma and slavery]
Member 4: Do me a favor and state a hypothesis followed by a citation. I'm not simply going to start clicking links when you surely know this is a contentious subject with dissenting papers and books all over the place…[Follow-up email] That's precisely the format I used when I responded to you in the first place. I submitted two hypotheses and then cited two pieces of evidence.
Just scanning your first paper, "Associations between caregiver ACEs and child internalizing symptoms in an urban African American sample." doesn't support anything you've claimed here. It lays the fault of childhood trauma on caregivers (parents and teachers) and could just as easily be caused by widespread criminality and poverty and have nothing whatsoever to do with a legacy of slavery.
This is what I mean when I claim the assertion of slavery 150 years ago hurting people today is dogmatic. The memory of slavery is stronger than the lack of a father? Stronger than chronic drug abuse? Stronger than poverty? Slavery may OR MAY NOT have crossed many generations to result in some of these problems but regardless why does it matter? Slavery clearly is not the problem now and we need solutions to problems now.
Member 3: Okay, first let's steelman your argument (i.e. try to restate your case in the strongest way possible.)
It was racist for the black parents at your kid's school to not invite the white parents to their barbecue just because they feel uneasy around them. People of their race are more likely than white people to resist arrest, and many of their young people are insolent and listen to music with violent lyrics, both of which you disapprove of. We know this is not genetic or situational because educated black people who come from Nigeria do well. Although some people of the white race have inflicted harm on people of the black race for almost 400 years, anti-black racism ended in the 70s, before many of these parents were born, so there's no chance it's still affecting them. Since then anti-white racism has grown and is threatening to destroy the country. These facts preclude the possibility of the black parents at your child's school feeling uneasy, and their exclusion of white parents can only be explained by racism.
Anyway, schools should not support parents' wishes to participate in their children's education in ways that feel most effective to them if it involves some people feeling left out or threatened.
Also, neurobiology and psychology make people lazy, and separate but equal is probably cool, but maybe not, because black children could really benefit from more adversity.
How'd I do?
Member 4: You started out strong but then I got confused about what you were attempting to attribute to me versus counterpoints you were attempting to present.
Although some people of the white race have inflicted harm on people of the black race for almost 400 years, statistically more people of the black race have inflicted harm on people of the white race for 50 years or more. I wont go into specifics but for one category, homicides, the rate of blacks killing whites is double the rate of whites killing blacks. The disparity is even higher for property crime. This highlights the abhorrent practice of attempting to gain the moral high ground with a victimization argument. There are a thousand different ways to measure victimization and NONE OF IT is valid when attempting to make an identitarian argument.
These facts preclude the possibility of the black parents at your child's school feeling uneasy, and their exclusion of white parents can only be explained by racism.
I don't think you understand what you're saying here. How is black teachers feeling uneasy around whites (because whites can be assumed to inflict harm) any different in any respect from white teachers feeling uneasy around blacks? (because blacks can be empirically proven to commit more crime) How do you not see that both of these are racist bigotry in the most fundamental way?? My niece was carjacked by a black man in San Francisco. Are you actually trying to argue that she has a right to demand she not work next to black people because she feels uneasy due to her personal experience??? It's absolutely unequivocally racism and I don't know why you're defending it.
Member 3: Ok, thanks for correcting me on a couple things: first, I misunderstood who the meeting was for. Second, I made an assumption about your beliefs about integration which is not borne out by anything you've said.
Your adversity argument has certainly been in the context of the coddling of black people, but you didn't say that directly.
I didn't actually mention anything about murders or carjackings, so that part's not really relevant. I don't think that's probably an issue at the teachers' get-together. Nor did I say that black teachers should have a choice not to work with white teachers.
The "despite almost 400 years..." part was an interjection on my part, so wasn't part of your specific argument. I believe the crux of that is that, in your opinion, the first 300 or so years don't really count with respect to reality today. Do I have that right? If we did include that, the numbers of black on white murders versus white on black would probably be quite different.
Member 4: Murders and carjackings are absolutely relevant IF your argument is people are group identities and not individuals. How can you make the argument that wrongs against people long dead committed by different people long dead are meaningful yet wrongs against people living today by different people living today are irrelevant? Any racial identity argument you want to make here goes both ways. I would submit that if you wish to play this game, wrongs against the white race NOW are far more impactful and hurtful than wrongs against the black race many generations ago. Let’s be very clear, I don't make this argument. Skin color carries with it no information about an individual therefore individuals in my view are not entitled to invoke guilt or victimhood. I am however accurately describing the views of progressives albeit they only function in one specific way and are not principled.
I'm well aware that the 400 years was interjected by you which is why it didn't sound like you were paraphrasing me at all and instead constructing a straw man. I'll try once again to make you see what you're doing. Nobody alive today is a victim of slavery. Nobody alive today needs to accept responsibility for slavery. It's a huge unsupported assertion that trauma from slavery keeps black people back and there doesn't seem to be any mechanism by which this trauma is transmitted. If you believe there is, the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders.
Member 3: I started out addressing the teachers' gathering, but added in a few other things, but not all the other things. So my referencing the "almost 400 years" issue actually did reflect one of your arguments.
My goal at this point is simply to restate your arguments and see if I have them right. (By this I mean the arguments you've made, not the ones you've verbalized but don't agree with.) So now I will add to your argument as I perceive it that 250 years of slavery followed by 100 Years of Jim Crow, including hundreds of lynchings and the occasional burning down of neighborhoods by white people, has no bearing on conditions or behaviors today. Correct? Or maybe it's just made insignificant by the higher proportion of crimes committed by black people vs. white in recent years. Am I correct in thinking that in your view these two phenomena are unrelated?
I think you're also saying that groups based on common characteristics, history or goals are basically the same as groups of random people, and should be treated as such. Looking forward to your feedback.
Member 4: You're overcomplicating this.
The horrible things done to humans in the past are in the past. There's no such thing as original sin or blood debt or inherited victimhood. You've made the argument that members of the black community have suffered trauma as a result of caretakers traumatizing children and you even linked an article supporting the hypothesis but how is this anything more than a statement that there are problems in black culture that need to be addressed? How in the hell does reflections on historical racism address this? I would argue it amplifies it. I would argue that the more rage you generate in this community, the more you teach that they are victims of a white supremacist culture, (basic CRT) the worse the (dare I say) abuse will get. Where is that going to lead?
I don't care about 250 years of slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow and 50 years of crime disparity. Those are complications and implications of your own world view. I presented them to try and make you aware of fallacies and certainly not arguments that I support!! I thought I made that clear. You can't focus on crimes and victims long dead and then pretend crimes and victims of current living citizens don't matter. You take all or you take none and I warn you that taking all will give power to white supremacists. They are also identitarians and don't assume that once you buy into an identitarian framework that you have the best argument.
As far as I'm concerned, there's no such thing as involuntary group identity of any kind. Thus there's no such thing as white privilege and black criminality. There's no such thing as white oppression nor is there any black victimization. ALL events of racism and discrimination are individual acts to be handled on an individual basis. They are also illegal. They are also mercilessly prosecuted both socially and in civil courts. It's never enough.
How is the left addressing perceived disparities? Eliminating grades so everyone passes. Creating black only dorms. Firing teachers who challenge students to think outside the box. Allowing black students with a C average admission over Asian students who are A+. This isn't just theoretical this is actually the landscape at most major universities. You want a horrible backlash resulting in Donald Trump or even worse? Antagonizing the majority with all these cases of wanton discrimination is how you get there.
The left is no longer liberal. I used to ask Roy what liberal principles he operated under and now I'll ask you the same thing. "Judge a man by his character and not the color of his skin" is a liberal principle that should be universally applied. Why in the hell are there people on the left trying to demolish this?? What principles do you personally believe in?
Member 3: Rants aside, have I reflected your beliefs accurately?
Member4: No you haven't. You're just making strawmen.
"250 years of slavery followed by 100 Years of Jim Crow, including hundreds of lynchings and the occasional burning down of neighborhoods by white people, has no bearing on conditions or behaviors today."
I never said anything remotely like that. It has certainly inspired black people to be racist against white people. It is dredged up repeatedly to incite fear and arrogance and lawlessness. I don't think those are the effects you're talking about but those are absolutely the effects that can be easily measured through actions and rhetoric. What I think you believe is that black people should be forgiven/excused for what they do and restorative justice should be applied but you're skipping a step. You can't actually prove that holding innocent people responsible for giving untested remedies to descendants of slaves will make anything better. I submit, and this is something you're welcome to quote me on, that it will make things much, much worse.
"I think you're also saying that groups based on common characteristics, history or goals are basically the same as groups of random people, and should be treated as such."
Absolutely not. I'm not a bigot therefore I deny involuntary group affiliations carry any information whatsoever when dealing with individuals. "groups should be treated" is not in my vocabulary. Moreover a newborn white baby and a newborn black baby do not inherit a "history" nor do they have any prescribed goals. To the extent that the parents and teachers are racist, they will attempt to convince those growing children that they actually do have a racial history and racial goals but it's a horrible thing to do. Why would you shackle a child with resentment that "his people" were victims of "those people" who can only be described as a kid of a different race sitting in the same classroom? Thus CRT is deadly. It's vile, it's stupid, it creates racism and it hurts people. My school district teaches from Delgado's Introduction to CRT. I consider it child abuse.
Member 2: Wow, I had no idea that White people were so oppressed by Black people! It's shocking to think how White people are being targeted by criminal Black people. It's reverse slavery!
Member 4: Hey look! It's LITERALLY a woman claiming criminal acts are reverse oppression! (we can assume slavery also) I know you were trying to make an absurd point but unfortunately "progressives" have become more absurd than fiction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Defense_of_Looting You know the most pathetic and disturbing thing about this is that this book has a 4 star review on Amazon.
Member 2: Of course! This woman's thinking represents the thinking of all women! Or all progressives!
Member 4: Something else I never said. However my point about progressives being anti-liberal and extremely oppressive and constantly trying to crush free speech is absolutely true.
As for an ideology justifying criminal behavior to redistribute wealth? That is simple Marxism and is also becoming endemic to the left wing.
Member 2: Ok. So all Progressives are oppressors?
Member 4: The racist concept of redistributive justice is so widespread in left-wing progressives that I would say the vast majority believe in using oppression to correct group imbalances.
Like it or not, denying an Asian person access to a university education so a lower scoring black person can get in is a form of discrimination and indeed oppressive.
Member 2: So to summarize your [Member 4’s] positions:
Progressives are oppressors
Women are literal and think alike
Black people are criminals
Being gay is voluntary and they spread disease through unprotected wild orgies
Transgenders are abnormal
Muslims are murderers
BLM Protesters are thugs
Asians are smart
Checking the scoreboard of people remaining that can be treated as individuals:
Straight White males who are not BLM
[At this point, Member 4 opts out of the discussion].