Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, AvBro GuestPost, Barry 4 Prez, PoliTricks as Usual, That Sh*t Is Racist, White Men Gone Wild
[Editor's Note: I don't usually like using other folks posts without getting pre-approval, but this was too good to not use as a guest post. Tim Wise is a white guy whom the MSM hates because he tells it like it is, especially as pertains to white privilege in America. I've constantly harped on the outlandish double standards seen throughout this year's campaign, but Wise breaks it down to the very last compound. Digest and discuss, you know where.]
For those who still can’t grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.
White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because “every family has challenges,” even as black and Latino families with similar “challenges” are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.
White privilege is when you can call yourself a “fuckin’ redneck,” like Bristol Palin’s boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you’ll “kick their fuckin’ ass,” and talk about how you like to “shoot shit” for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.
White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.
White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don’t all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you’re “untested.”
White privilege is being able to say that you support the words “under God” in the pledge of allegiance because “if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it’s good enough for me,” and not be immediately disqualified from holding office–since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the “under God” part wasn’t added until the 1950s–while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea only supported by mushy liberals.
White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you.
White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was “Alaska first,” and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you’re black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she’s being disrespectful.
White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do–like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor–and people think you’re being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college–you’re somehow being mean, or even sexist.
White privilege is being able to convince white women who don’t even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a “second look.”
White privilege is being able to fire people who didn’t support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.
White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God’s punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you’re just a good church-going Christian, but if you’re black and friends with a black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you’re an extremist who probably hates America.
White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a “trick question,” while being black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O’Reilly means you’re dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.
[Editor's Note: Black privilege is being able to say "the N-word" with reckless abandon, telling "white folks are sooo..." jokes on Comic View, and.... and.... uhmmm, that's about it.]
White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it a “light” burden.
And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren’t sure about that whole “change” thing. Ya know, it’s just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain…
White privilege is, in short, the problem.
Question: Do you agree with Tim Wise that the double standards confronting Obama are prime examples of white privilege?
More from Tim Wise [TimWise.org]
* Props to DP for sending this along.
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, Go Sit Down, Grand Hu$tle, PoliTricks as Usual
So, the media (aka: Fox News) is all in a tizzy about how Tina Fey Sarah Palin and her daughter have been demonized by “Obama surrogates”. Never mind the fact that the “surrogates” they’re referring to also happen to be the media themselves, not anyone officially related to the Obama campaign.
I’ll admit, the now magically vanished DailyKos posts that asserted Palin’s youngest son were actually her grandson were loooowww. Period. All they had to do was some requisite math to figure out that there’s no way her daughter could be pregnant twice at the same time.[1] There’s no way you can defend that sort of “journalism”. Period.
It should be noted, however, that the Palin campaign only announced the daughter’s pregnancy after the DailyKos hit piece placed pressure on them. I still don’t think the kid’s pregnancy is any of our business, but perhaps this rabid speculation could have been squelched had the family simply admitted this up front. Again, I’m not in any way defending the DailyKos, but still. The Palins had to know this was coming.
Now, of course, the “media” (aka: Fox News) is making this election and Palin’s selection as Veep a referendum on sexism in America. As if this is the first time sexism has reared it’s ugly head this year. Of course, it’s easier to be so concerned about the plight of women and candidate’s families when you actually endorse said candidate. Fox was predictably mum as they (and other news outlets, but NOT the Obama campaign) slammed Hillary Clinton. And let’s not forget the constant hatchet job they did on Michelle Obama all Spring. But now, we’re supposed to believe they’re so concerned about sexism. These same folks who called a candidate’s wife a “Baby Mama”.
Wigga Please!
Anyone with a 3rd eye can see the obvious Grand Hu$tle here: the more they make Palin a victim, then less people focus on the sketchy job she did while in Alaska.
There’s the somewhat discussed Troopergate issue, that found Palin doing a Kwame Kilpatrick style revenge-firing of a the State Chief of Police. His problem? He wouldn’t fire Palin’s ex-brother in law. So, she fired him instead. This is actively under investigation.She eats a lot of pork. Despite how much the GOP wants to paint her as a “maverick”, reality is she’s been in cahoots with the very same folks (Senator Ted Stevens and Rep Don Young) she’s now so renowned about having railed against. When she was the mayor of
a tiny cul de sacWassila, she received a staggering $27M in federal earmarks from the very gentlemen listed above. Yes, $27M for a town the size of two Boston city blocks. The majority of that money went to build a train line connecting Stevens’ hometown with Wasilla. Some maverick.She gets more “maverick” street cred from challenging and defeating the $260M “bridge to nowhere”. Never mind the fact that she supported the very same project as recently as 2006. And the final nail in the coffin: while she rejected the money for the bridge, the state of Alaska still kept the $260M and used it for other projects. So, despite what was said, the money was still spent. Again, some maverick.
She is for teaching creationism in public schools.
She has her very own Rebb’n Wright. Pastor Ed Kalnins makes Wright look like a Disney character.
She is so adamantly pro-life that she doesn’t even believe in abortions, even in cases of rape and incest. I can’t see this hardline stance being very attractive to Clinton supporters.
Depending on where you look, she may or may not have been a member of Alaskan Independence Party, which favors the 49th state seceding from the US and becoming a country of it’s own.
She wasn’t even fully vetted for Veep until last Wednesday. McCain had only met her one in person before last Friday’s surprise announcement.
Please note that everything above is all a matter of public record, substantiated by “reliable” news sources linked to below. There’s no hearsay. This is fact.
Again, I don’t have anything personal against Palin. The whole “she needs to be home raising her kids” thing is ludicrous. Peoples’ minor daughters get pregnant by 18 year old d-bags named Levi all the time.[2] You can have both a career and a family. Men do it all the time, nobody complains.
But when you look at the facts, it’s hard for me to believe anybody thinks Palin is qualified to be POTUS in the unlikely event that John McCain meets an untimely demise. I’m sorry, I just don’t see it.
And on that note, what does this say about McCain’s judgement? He practically chose Palin is a kneejerk reaction to gain traction once Obama passed on Hillary. He didn’t vet her properly, and clearly didn’t bother seeing how her past contradicts the very issues he’s so strongly advocating. If he’s willing to make such a rash judgement on someone who could become The Leader Of The Free World, what does it say about his ability to choose cabinet members and make judicial appointments? I’m just sayin’.
So, I’ll peep the speech tonight, and marvel at the fact that Palin has been able to ascend to such heights in such a short period of time. Should the GOP win, her appointment as Vice President will be no doubt be historic.
It’s just not the sorta history I wanna live to see.
Question: Do you feel the Mainstream Media is paying enough attention to Sarah Palin’s actual record?
Palin’s Small Alaska Town Secured Big Federal Funds [WashPost]
‘Creation science’ enters the race [Alaska Daily News
Sarah Palin's ties to Alaskan Independence Party are played down [LA Times]
Long-Standing Feud in Alaska Embroils Palin [WashPost]
Palin Was for the ‘Bridge to Nowhere,’ Too [AOL News]
Palin’s Future Son-In-Law A “Redneck” [CBS Early Show]
Palin’s Church May Have Shaped Controversial Worldview [HuffPost]
[1] I know. Twins. I know.
[2] Uh, would this be statutory rape or is it just me?
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, Barry 4 Prez, MLK is Crying Inside, PoliTricks as Usual, That Sh*t Is Racist, The Evil That Men Do, White Men Gone Wild
Something finally occurred to me this weekend as I was perusing the Sunday morning talk shows.
On Whatever Fox New’s Show With Chris Wallace Is Called, they spent 55 minutes talking smack about Barack Obama and how his trip to Europe was arrogant[1], premature, patronizing and a threat to American security. They called his historic speech in Berlin a massive photo-op, and even made a point that the last person to pull those sorts of crowds in Germany was a pretty sinister guy himself. Oh, and they capped the show off by spending 5 minutes grovelling about how John McCain didn’t get any press all week and how the media was in the tank for Obama.
Ditto on The Chris Matthews Show, which was one big Obama lovefest. Same for Meet The Press, which actually had Obama as a guest. I didn’t even bother watching The McLaughlin Group.
The past couple of months have taught me something about John McCain. Nobody is talking about him, because nobody cares about him. He brings no new ideas to the table. He is not exciting. You’d be hard pressed to convince me that he’s going to change my life for the better in any significant fashion.
Besides, the guy flips more than Dominique Dawes. There was affirmative action. The King holiday. FISA. Courting evangelicals. Privatization of Social Security. Bush’s tax cuts. Offshore drilling. Abortion. Campaign finance reform. Gay adoption. Torture. Bob Jones University. Ethanol. The Confederate flag. Defense spending. The estate tax.
But this guy’s supposed to be a firm, disciplined leader, huh? I dunno, but he sorta kinda seems like an empty-suited opportunist to me.
Dirk Nowitzki is a Maverick. Jerry Stackhouse is a Maverick. Jason Kidd is a Maverick.
John McCain ain’t no Maverick.
That said, it’s clear from anyone listening to talk radio, watching the news, or simply overhearing any level of Conservative discourse that this year’s race isn’t about getting their guy into office, it’s about keeping that potentially evil Beige Negro out.
That’s right folks. Barack Hussein Obama II[2] ain’t running against John Sidney McCain III.
Nope, Barack Hussein Obama II is running against the United States Of America.
He’s running against Ron Artest. Bobby Brown. Terrell Owens. Sharpe James. Malcolm X. DMX. Louis Farrakhan. Latrell Sprewell. Willie Horton. Eldridge Cleaver. Rae Carruth. John Brown. Nat Turner. Dennis Rodman. Ray Lewis. Bobby Cutts. William Jefferson. John Allen Muhammad. Marion Barry. Ray Nagin. Bill Campbell. Kimbo Slice. Bigger Thomas. Isaiah Thomas. Larry Davis. Wayne Williams. Robert Kelly. Marcus Garvey. Jesse Jackson. Clifford Harris. Stokley Carmichael. Jeremiah Wright. Chad Johnson. OJ Simpson. Al Sharpton. Mike Tyson. Darryl Strawberry. Michael Vick. The random mailroom Negro who stole that iPod. That random Negro suspect on last night’s 6 o’clock news.[3]
In short, he’s running against America’s preconceived notions of what and who a black man should, and should not be.
I firmly do not believe that this is a country full of racists. I just don’t. Have I experienced racist treatment in my thirtysome years? Absolutely. But more often than not, I’ve simply experienced cultural ignorance. The sort of cultural ignorance that makes others skeptical of you the moment they see your face. The sort of cultural ignorance that follows you around the store. The sort of cultural ignorance that makes you have to work twice as hard to get half as far. The sort of cultural ignorance that assumes you got where you did in life simply because you’re Black, which as any Black person knows, is the dumbest sh*t ever uttered.
Are some people withholding their support from Obama because they’re racist? Sure, but these folks are likely in a very small minority. Many of them simply can’t wrap their minds around giving a Black man The Most Important Gig Evar™ because of the same cultural ignorance. The sort of cultural ignorance that assumes a Black man with a funny name must be secretly evil. The sort of cultural ignorance that takes an educated Black man who came from humble beginnings and somehow reduces him to a stereotypical elitist. The sort of cultural ignorance that assumes a Black man can’t possibly be smart enough for such a gig. The sort of cultural ignorance that somehow paints this Black man as a racist by proxy because of something his pastor said out of context a decade ago. The sort of cultural ignorance that will emphatically not disappear between now and November 4th.
This is all very true, and all very sad.
I wish Barack Obama the best. I have, and will continue to support him financially, on this blog, and as a volunteer. But until we as a country can be honest and forthright about our history of skepticism towards people of color in general, and Black people specifically, even an Obama victory won’t mean anything symbolically.
It will simply mean America made the right choice on November 4th. Not that we’re somehow beyond the wrong choices of the past.
Question: Do you agree that Obama is more or less running against the historical stereotypes of Black men? Is there any single thing he can do between now and November to minimize the effect of this?
McCain’s flourishing flip-flop list [CarpetbaggerReport]
McCain Sets a New Record: 10 Flip-Flops in Two Weeks [Crooks and Liars]
Master List of McCain Flip Flops [Mugsy's Rap Sheet]
[1] Could someone please explain to White America the difference between arrogance and swagger?!? Arrogance in smug condescension that screams “I’m better than you!”. Swagger is simply the quiet inner belief that you’re the sh*t, despite what dem‘ haters might say. A Black man in America can’t survive without some healthy level of swag, and I don’t mean the kind that comes wrapped in pink furs and crispy Air Force Ones. Obama isn’t arrogant. Obama drips swagger. Arrogance = Bad. Swag = Good. Nuff‘ said.
[2] I thought the general rules of naming ettiquette said you could only become a II once you had a boy child who was a III. Otherwise, you’re just a Jr. for life. At least that’s what I was told/read. I didn’t formally become a II until AverageToddler (a III) was born. I was a Jr. till that point. What’s with Obama just discarding decorum like that? Is this a Kenyan thing? Anyone care to explain?
[3] Did I forget anyone? You tell me and I’ll add em’. AverageSis gets props for half of that list.
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, Drive-By Activism, Judge Joe Brown Says : "DO BETTER.", Knee-Grow Please, Nigga Nonsense, Raise Your Own Damn Kids, TeeVee Sux, That Sh*t Is Racist
[Editor's Note: This one's a doozy! You're probably not going to agree with me, and you're certainly entitled so your opinion. But read with an open mind if nothing else. Then flame me.]
Every month or so, there seems to be some sorta televised “Townhall Discussion on The State Of Black America”. BET always is airing something or another about hip-hop’s effect on black kids. T(r)avis Smiley’s got his annual State Of The Black Union. And now, not to be outdone, CNN is diving headfirst into the sewer of Negro Dysfunction with it’s own series, entitled Black In America.
The prelude to this series aired last weekend. It was your typical townhall discussion about how screwed up black folks (particularly men) are, and took place in New Orleans, the new Ground Zero for Negro Intellectualism. On the panel were the usual suspects: an academic (Cornell West in that same damn black suit), a preacher (TD Jakes), an entertainer (Tom Joyner), a journalist (Ed Gordon), and the token woman (the always brilliant Julianne Malveaux, spoken over repeatedly) to round out the bunch. And as expected, the show was little more than a feelgood hour of SoundByte Olympics™. Lots of $5 words were bandied about. Black men were singled out as the Root Of All Negro Evil. White folks and “the system” were blamed. And at the end of the 90 minute discussion, I walked away with no greater insight into exactly what the solutions are.
Like every other panel discussion, this one delved headfirst into everything that’s wrong with black men. They don’t want to get married. They make babies and don’t support them. They get locked up and bring home AIDS. They don’t take responsibility for what they create. Blah, blah, blah.
These are all very valid points, and I’d be the last one to catch feelings, given the fact that I more or less advocate the very same thing here daily. There is little doubt that we as black men need to get our collective sh*t together. This is an indisputable fact. No denying it. You won’t hear any sorts of denials of that on this site. No siree Bob.
But what about the other side of the equation?
I know I’ll probably lose some female readers here, but it needs to be brought (BRING IT!!) so I can’t hold my tongue any longer. How about somebody on one of these shows challenges Black Women to make smarter, less emotion-driven decisions about whom they give the nookie to?
Yes, there are, have always been, and shall always be triflin’ men (Negroes or otherwise). But blaming them for every societal ill misses the fact that it takes two to tango. Two to lay down and make a baby. Two to get married. Two to maintain a healthy marriage. Two to run a household. Two to make a family, at least as defined by the standard everyone seems to advocate.
By just continually calling out black men, yet treating women as perpetual victims, you’re missing a huge chunk of that whole “shared responsibility” thing. Women are on average vastly smarter than men, but they sometimes choose to see what they want to see. Women have a far greater gift of discernment when it comes to relationships. They remember things better. So why let them off the hook if they’re so much better equipped when it comes to sniffing out B.S.?
Let’s keep it 100, ladies. You know you can tell if the Negro is sorry from the moment you meet him. You know that if he’s already got three babies by five women, chances are you’re just gonna become another harrowing statistic. You know that if he’s got a crime record longer than Manute Bol, he is prolly not gonna be able to hold down a 9-to-5. You know that is he looks like a playa, walks like a playa, and talks like a playa, chances are he’s a sorry, triflin’ assed Negro. This is all common sense, yet so many women overlook this glaring evidence when it comes to choosing mates.
Yes, I know some men lie. Some of us are exceptionally good at doing so. But women are always smarter. They always know what’s up. They just choose to see what they want to see.
Men in general do about 75% of what we do to attract the opposite sex. Wack Niggas do about 110% of what they do to attract the opposite sex. Wack Niggas will not evolve as long as they’re rewarded (with cookies) for being Wack Niggas. This isn’t too complex an equation, ladies.
In short, stop giving your cookies to Wack Niggas!!![1]
Think about it, Barack Obama got both applauded (by me) and reamed (by others) for challenging Black Men to step up during his recent Father’s Day speech. This was completely necessary, and any dude who caught feelings about this needs to seriously check himself. But cunning as Barry is, there’s no way in Holy Hades that Beige Negro would even remotely consider pulling such a stunt on Mother’s Day. You know this and I know this. Because you just don’t talk about nobody’s Mama, and most Black women will be somebody’s Mama during the course of their lifetimes. But that’s a part of the problem that these shows, and black culture in general, seem to ignore for some odd reason.
Here’s some real solutions for Black America.
If there’s one thing black folks are good for, it’s talking. Fixing? Uhhh, not so much. And shows like this, which seem to be little more than Intellectual Masturbation™ really trouble me, because for all the brains and fame these panels usually include, there’s seldom, if ever any definitive takeaways for the audiences to implement. There’s just lots of good “talkin”, lots of applause, and plenty more questions than answers. And as a result, we stay losing.
Nope, no solutions. Just plenty of pontificators “gettin’ off”, thus the photo above, in case you were looking for context.
So, I prolly won’t be doing any recaps of CNN’s Black In America, because I’ve frankly got better things to do, like being a husband and father and generally making sure I’m more of the solution than the problem. And who the hell wants to sit around watching more and more bad news about Black folks? Shouldn’t any black person with a brain already know most of this stuff by now? Aren’t Black people more or less born knowing this stuff? So since we’re putting our worst foot forward, I wonder exactly whom this show is for? It’s clearly not to educate, inform, or challenge Black America to grow. So it must be for White America to watch, and gawk at, and further ingrain the same negative stereotypes about Negro life in America.
Sorry, but I can’t bother watching any more of this crap until we can be totally honest about the issues that plague Black America, not just pandering to see who can get the loudest applause.
I hope that Emmy was worth it, Mrs. O’Brien.[2]
Question: Did I just lose half of female AverageNation™? Were my points about the victimization of Black women anywhere in the ballpark, or is AB.com just a piece of sexist propaganda? Did you watch Black In America? Did it “need to be brought?”
CNN Presents: Black In America [CNN.com]
[1] I hate using that word, but sometimes it’s the only one that’s appropriate. Forgive me if you’re as squeamish about this sorta thing as I am.
[2] BTW, I didn’t even watch this crap, but I told ya’ll about Soledad “color-me-mine” O’Brien months ago. But you ain’t wanna hear me though. Now ya’ll mad. Hmmmm.
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, C.Y.I.N., Nigga Nonsense, Raise Your Own Damn Kids, That Sh*t Is Racist, You Must Learn
Sitting at the doctor’s office with AverageToddler the other morning, I overhead another parent trying to summon her child.
“Come here, Sha-Vaughn-Dray!!!”
I had to do a triple-take. What the heck sorta name is ShaVaughnDray? Maybe I couldn’t really comprehend the name cause you know how DC folks are with their accents and whatnot. Still, I couldn’t help but think about this poor kid and the years of misspellings and mispronunciations his bright future would likely hold. And part of me wondered why the world she couldn’t just call him Andre.
Many will argue that names don’t make the (wo)man. Others would say that names are pretty darned important. I guess I fall somewhere in the middle.
I’ve got a very, very, very common government name. It also happens to be my father’s name, but it’s pretty darned common. Over the years I’ve tried dressing it up by using different variations of it, as well as adding or dropping letters (no, seriously), but reality is the name’s the name.
And there’s nothing wrong with that of course. The name’s got history. I’m named after my Pops, and since I obviously admire him immensely, that’s always been a huge source of pride and motivation to carve my own niche in this world. My brothers (although they’re older) were named after older family members. Each of us carried our names forward, and bestowed them upon our firstborn sons. So, it’s become a roundabout family tradition, one that I’m quite proud of.
If it were up to me, I’d create a new Man Law. Every man would have to name his son after himself, no matter how inane (in my case) or outrageous (ie: that NFL player named D’Brickashaw) it may be. Because there’s just something really special about being a Jr., II, III, or in the rarest of cases, IV. Again, just my opinion.
That said, although I wouldn’t do it, I guess I understand why people name their kids things like ShaVaughnDray and D’Brickashaw. Because beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder, and who the heck am I to tell someone that Marqueeshiah or Shenehneh isn’t beautiful? They could just as easily look at me and say “John” is boring and unimaginative, and is some strange way, they’d be right.
The only real downside to these somewhat crazy names would be when the child has to someday attempt to get a job. That’s where the unfortunate side-effects of gettin‘ cute with a name can come back to bite him/her in the butt. I’m sure this is hardly new-news to any member of AverageNation™ but having a “black” name can cost you when those HR folks are browsing thru resumes.
Two recent papers from the Cambridge-based National Bureau of Economic Research draw somewhat different conclusions about whether a black name is a burden. One, an analysis of the 16 million births in California between 1960 and 2000, claims it has no significant effect on how someone’s life turns out.If nothing else, the first paper, by the NBER’s Roland Fryer and the University of Chicago’s Steven Levitt, based on California birth data, provides probably the most detailed snapshot yet of distinctive naming practices. It shows, for instance, that in recent years, more than 40 percent of black girls were given names that weren’t given to even one of the more than 100,000 white girls born in the state the same year.
The paper says black names are associated with lower socioeconomic status, but the authors don’t believe it’s the names that create an economic burden.
Using Social Security numbers, they track the changes in circumstances of women born in the early 1970s who then show up in the data in 1980s and ’90s as mothers themselves. The data also show whether those second-generation mothers have health insurance and in which Zip Codes they reside – admittedly imperfect measurements of economic achievement.
The data do appear to show that a poor woman’s daughter is more likely to be poor when she gives birth herself – but no more so because she has a distinctively black name.
So, one study says no real correlation between name and eventual outcome. But another study contradicts that to some degree.
The other, however, suggests a black-sounding name remains an impediment to getting a job. After responding to 1,300 classified ads with dummy resumes, the authors found black-sounding names were 50 percent less likely to get a callback than white-sounding names with comparable resumes.The University of Chicago’s Marianne Bertrand and MIT’s Sendhil Mullainathan, however, appeared to find that a black-sounding name can be an impediment, in another recent NBER paper entitled “Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal?”
The authors took the content of 500 real resumes off online job boards and then evaluated them, as objectively as possible, for quality, using such factors as education and experience. Then they replaced the names with made-up names picked to “sound white” or “sound black” and responded to 1,300 job ads in The Boston Globe and Chicago Tribune last year.
White names got about one callback per 10 resumes; black names got one per 15. Carries and Kristens had call-back rates of more than 13 percent, but Aisha, Keisha and Tamika got 2.2 percent, 3.8 percent and 5.4 percent, respectively. And having a higher quality resume, featuring more skills and experience, made a white-sounding name 30 percent more likely to elicit a callback, but only 9 percent more likely for black-sounding names.
Of course, no “study” is perfect, but I guess it’s some minor food for thought.
Either way, it doesn’t really matter to me. Life will prolly be harder for a black kid than a white kid in America any way you dice it, regardless of whether that kid’s named Lawrence or LacKquan. And besides, a recent study also showed that education aside, blacks who merely “sounded black” were likely to be lesser compensated than blacks who “sounded white”.
No, really.
Blacks who “sound black” earn salaries that are 10 percent lower than blacks who do not “sound black,” even after controlling for measures of intelligence, experience in the work force, and other factors that influence how much people earn. (For what it is worth, whites who “sound black” earn 6 percent lower than other whites.)Grogger asked multiple listeners to rate each voice and assigned the voice either to a distinctly white or black category (if the listeners all tended to agree on the race), or an indistinct category if there was disagreement.
Then he put this measure of whether a voice sounded black into a regression (the standard statistical tool that economists use for estimating things), and came up with the finding that blacks who “sound black” earn almost 10 percent less, even after taking into account other factors that could influence earnings. One piece of interesting good news is that blacks who do not “sound black” earn essentially the same as whites.
So there you have it. You’re darned if you do and darned if you don’t. So name your child LayQuittria or BeYonDray all you want. Just make sure you teach them the joys of code-switching, no matter what.
Cause a name is truly a just name. But soundin‘ white is always right.
Question: Do you think a name is truly “just a name” or a self-fulfilling prophecy? Should parents give more thought to exactly what they’re calling their kids? If you have an “ethnic” government name, do you think it’s ever hurt your employment prospects? What’s the weirdest (and I’m not talkin‘ “ghetto” here) name you’ve ever personally heard?
‘Black’ Names A Resume Burden? [CBS]
How Much Does It Cost You in Wages if You “Sound Black?” [NY Times]
Previous Editions of C.Y.I.N. Case Study [AB.com]
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, C.Y.I.N., Nigga Nonsense, Raise Your Own Damn Kids, That Sh*t Is Racist, You Must Learn
Sitting at the doctor’s office with AverageToddler the other morning, I overhead another parent trying to summon her child.
“Come here, Sha-Vaughn-Dray!!!”
I had to do a triple-take. What the heck sorta name is ShaVaughnDray? Maybe I couldn’t really comprehend the name cause you know how DC folks are with their accents and whatnot. Still, I couldn’t help but think about this poor kid and the years of misspellings and mispronunciations his bright future would likely hold. And part of me wondered why the world she couldn’t just call him Andre.
Many will argue that names don’t make the (wo)man. Others would say that names are pretty darned important. I guess I fall somewhere in the middle.
I’ve got a very, very, very common government name. It also happens to be my father’s name, but it’s pretty darned common. Over the years I’ve tried dressing it up by using different variations of it, as well as adding or dropping letters (no, seriously), but reality is the name’s the name.
And there’s nothing wrong with that of course. The name’s got history. I’m named after my Pops, and since I obviously admire him immensely, that’s always been a huge source of pride and motivation to carve my own niche in this world. My brothers (although they’re older) were named after older family members. Each of us carried our names forward, and bestowed them upon our firstborn sons. So, it’s become a roundabout family tradition, one that I’m quite proud of.
If it were up to me, I’d create a new Man Law. Every man would have to name his son after himself, no matter how inane (in my case) or outrageous (ie: that NFL player named D’Brickashaw) it may be. Because there’s just something really special about being a Jr., II, III, or in the rarest of cases, IV. Again, just my opinion.
That said, although I wouldn’t do it, I guess I understand why people name their kids things like ShaVaughnDray and D’Brickashaw. Because beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder, and who the heck am I to tell someone that Marqueeshiah or Shenehneh isn’t beautiful? They could just as easily look at me and say “John” is boring and unimaginative, and is some strange way, they’d be right.
The only real downside to these somewhat crazy names would be when the child has to someday attempt to get a job. That’s where the unfortunate side-effects of gettin‘ cute with a name can come back to bite him/her in the butt. I’m sure this is hardly new-news to any member of AverageNation™ but having a “black” name can cost you when those HR folks are browsing thru resumes.
Two recent papers from the Cambridge-based National Bureau of Economic Research draw somewhat different conclusions about whether a black name is a burden. One, an analysis of the 16 million births in California between 1960 and 2000, claims it has no significant effect on how someone’s life turns out.If nothing else, the first paper, by the NBER’s Roland Fryer and the University of Chicago’s Steven Levitt, based on California birth data, provides probably the most detailed snapshot yet of distinctive naming practices. It shows, for instance, that in recent years, more than 40 percent of black girls were given names that weren’t given to even one of the more than 100,000 white girls born in the state the same year.
The paper says black names are associated with lower socioeconomic status, but the authors don’t believe it’s the names that create an economic burden.
Using Social Security numbers, they track the changes in circumstances of women born in the early 1970s who then show up in the data in 1980s and ’90s as mothers themselves. The data also show whether those second-generation mothers have health insurance and in which Zip Codes they reside – admittedly imperfect measurements of economic achievement.
The data do appear to show that a poor woman’s daughter is more likely to be poor when she gives birth herself – but no more so because she has a distinctively black name.
So, one study says no real correlation between name and eventual outcome. But another study contradicts that to some degree.
The other, however, suggests a black-sounding name remains an impediment to getting a job. After responding to 1,300 classified ads with dummy resumes, the authors found black-sounding names were 50 percent less likely to get a callback than white-sounding names with comparable resumes.The University of Chicago’s Marianne Bertrand and MIT’s Sendhil Mullainathan, however, appeared to find that a black-sounding name can be an impediment, in another recent NBER paper entitled “Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal?”
The authors took the content of 500 real resumes off online job boards and then evaluated them, as objectively as possible, for quality, using such factors as education and experience. Then they replaced the names with made-up names picked to “sound white” or “sound black” and responded to 1,300 job ads in The Boston Globe and Chicago Tribune last year.
White names got about one callback per 10 resumes; black names got one per 15. Carries and Kristens had call-back rates of more than 13 percent, but Aisha, Keisha and Tamika got 2.2 percent, 3.8 percent and 5.4 percent, respectively. And having a higher quality resume, featuring more skills and experience, made a white-sounding name 30 percent more likely to elicit a callback, but only 9 percent more likely for black-sounding names.
Of course, no “study” is perfect, but I guess it’s some minor food for thought.
Either way, it doesn’t really matter to me. Life will prolly be harder for a black kid than a white kid in America any way you dice it, regardless of whether that kid’s named Lawrence or LacKquan. And besides, a recent study also showed that education aside, blacks who merely “sounded black” were likely to be lesser compensated than blacks who “sounded white”.
No, really.
Blacks who “sound black” earn salaries that are 10 percent lower than blacks who do not “sound black,” even after controlling for measures of intelligence, experience in the work force, and other factors that influence how much people earn. (For what it is worth, whites who “sound black” earn 6 percent lower than other whites.)Grogger asked multiple listeners to rate each voice and assigned the voice either to a distinctly white or black category (if the listeners all tended to agree on the race), or an indistinct category if there was disagreement.
Then he put this measure of whether a voice sounded black into a regression (the standard statistical tool that economists use for estimating things), and came up with the finding that blacks who “sound black” earn almost 10 percent less, even after taking into account other factors that could influence earnings. One piece of interesting good news is that blacks who do not “sound black” earn essentially the same as whites.
So there you have it. You’re darned if you do and darned if you don’t. So name your child LayQuittria or BeYonDray all you want. Just make sure you teach them the joys of code-switching, no matter what.
Cause a name is truly a just name. But soundin‘ white is always right.
Question: Do you think a name is truly “just a name” or a self-fulfilling prophecy? Should parents give more thought to exactly what they’re calling their kids? If you have an “ethnic” government name, do you think it’s ever hurt your employment prospects? What’s the weirdest (and I’m not talkin‘ “ghetto” here) name you’ve ever personally heard?
‘Black’ Names A Resume Burden? [CBS]
How Much Does It Cost You in Wages if You “Sound Black?” [NY Times]
Previous Editions of C.Y.I.N. Case Study [AB.com]
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, Get Money, Grand Hu$tle, NBA = Nuthin' But Africans, That Sh*t Is Racist
[Editor's Note: This post is wordy and it is sports-related. I didn't plan on writing this much, but hey, I'm clearly talking about a topic I spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about: Basketball. You may wanna print this one and save it for after lunch if you know what I mean. Enjoy Responsibly.]
The whole “should players be able to skip college to go to the NBA?” debate is old news now. A few years back, NBA Commissioner David Stern somehow managed to trick negotiate the NBA Players Association into enforcing a “one year” rule. Essentially, you can’t enter the NBA Draft until one year after your high school class graduates.
I agreed with this rule, but not for the reason many might think. I have absolutely nothing against young brothers gettin’ their paper. Reality is, you can always go back to college, but you can’t be projected as a 1st round pick forever. As much as critics love picking on dudes like Korleone Young and Johnathan Bender for striking out by skipping college, there’s just as many dudes who stayed in school too long and ended up ruining their pro prospects by coming out after their stock peaked.
Uhhh, Roy Hibbert anyone?
Besides, the fact that so many people “care” about the plight of young black men is laughable. To all the “advocates” so worried about how these poor men would fare if they didn’t get a couple of semesters at State U., your hypocrisy is startling. How many of these same “advocates” give a crap about the other 11 guys on that dude’s high school team who not only aren’t skipping college to the NBA, but aren’t even going to college, period? It’s obvious these “advocates” only care about the money and acclaim these player can bring to their alma maters.
And on the flipside, why all the worry about basketball players only? Who’s worrying about the social adjustment of tennis players, who usually drop outta middle school to be trained fulltime? Nobody cares about tween stars like Miley Cyrus and the High School Musical kids. These kids seldom bother getting any formal education beyond basic tutoring once they pursue their craft.
So, again, I have no issue with players skipping school, or leaving after one season. My problem is that these guys are usually not ready skillwise to play at the NBA level. They usually end up wasting roster spots that would be best used on more developed players or seasoned vets.
The ultimate example of this would be the picture above. So painful is that photo for me to look at that I won’t even bother captioning it or telling you who the two men pictured are. If one of you wants to explain this photo to the non-sporting members of AverageNation™, do so below.
I am beginning to tear up a bit. Painful memories, folks. Seriously.
Anyways, now that the “one-and-done” rule is in effect, the predicted outcome is happening. Guys are coming to school, putting up crazy numbers, and dropping outta class by the time the Final Four rolls around. This past year’s NBA draft lottery alone featured a record 7 freshmen chosen in the Top 14 picks. The usual zealots (Dick Vitale, Jay Bilas) are now beginning to bellyache for a “two-and-done” rule, since this easy exodus of star power will leave the NCAA noticeably depleted of overall talent next season.
I figured that sooner or later, some player would get tired of the whole charade and simply find a way to kill time somewhere other than a college campus to burn that one year away before he could be drafted. The options have been seldom utilized, but they include playing one season at prep school, going to to NBA D-League for a year, or and risky choice not yet exercised until now.
Former Arizona recruit Brandon Jennings is expected to sign with a European-based agent as early as Monday, get an American-based marketing director for sneaker company deals and secure a contract with a European or Israeli team within the next two weeks, Jennings’ advisers told ESPN.com Friday.Jennings signed to play at Arizona out of Oak Hill (Va.) Academy but is from Los Angeles. Jennings isn’t eligible for the NBA draft until a year after he graduates from high school. Jennings didn’t receive a qualifying standardized test score. His third and final test result was due Friday but Valle said it’s a moot point. Jennings is choosing Europe over Arizona.
Valle said Jennings could be open to a multi-year contract overseas, although his primary goal is to play in the NBA, beginning in 2009-10. The NBA confirmed once Jennings signs a pro contract overseas and is 19, he will become eligible for the 2009 draft. But Vaccaro said a longer-term deal with a buyout is a possibility for Jennings since it would give the overseas club leverage with an NBA franchise and give Jennings some security.
Here’s Mr. Jennings in action. He seems pretty bright and well grounded, which is why his lack of academic success is so puzzling.
A pure point guard in the mold of Chris Paul, Jennings is a 5-Star recruit who would certainly be an early lottery pick next year if he panned out as a freshman at Arizona. And it should be noted that Jennings’ main reason for going overseas is not some noble protest, but rather the fact that he’s unlikely to qualify academically and would likely have to redshirt, completely tanking his stock. So, off to Belarus this talented, but naive kid is going.
Scouts say that if Jennings plays well overseas, the net effect would be the same as playing one season of college ball. He’ll make a few hundred thousand for one season of play. Then he’ll be a lottery pick and will make millions before he turns 19.
But there are huge risks. International basketball is quite different from the NBA. The style of play varies widely. The opposing players, even those Jennings’ age, in many cases have been pros for several seasons already. He will be playing grown assed men who don’t know or care that he’s some hotshot NBA prospect. He will have to learn the culture of a new country, and figure out how to juggle the language barrier. He will likely not have an extensive support group. And since Euroleague teams often have limits on the number of Americans per roster, as well as the number of minutes they can play, it’s entirely possible that he might find himself riding the bench merely for political reasons beyond his control. This could seriously backfire and adversely effect his draft status.
Whether or not others follow suit and start skipping the charade of college ball altogether remains to be seen, but several high profile recruits from next year’s high school senior classes are said to be considering the same route. Should this become a trend, the longterm effects could be devastating to college basketball. Time will tell if this is the beginning of the end of March Madness, or just some dumb kid who got some very bad advice and ruined his life.
I’ll be keeping an eye on this, but I guess it raises a real question: Why not just start paying these guys to play college basketball?
NCAA basketball and football teams bring millions to the coffers of universities nationwide. These sports usually provide the financial support for non-revenue generating sports like lacrosse, softball, and track and field. In many states, the highest paid public employee is some D-1 football or basketball coach. No, really.
What would be so wrong about doing some sorta profit sharing like any other corporation? Seriously, if a school can pay its’ coach $3M per season, why shouldn’t the very players that make said coach, the AD, and the Chancellor all richer get anything in return?
Why not give the players some set percentage of the program’s earnings for a given season and put them in a mutual fund that becomes fully “vested” once the player’s eligibility runs out? Guys who leave early simply forfeit this money, transfers and non-medical redshirts are exempt. All players, regardless of stats or position, get the same set amount contributed. Those graduating on-time get a financial bonus. The guys who stay, and God-willing, actually graduate, will leave school with a few thousand dollars and a headstart on life after hoops. Non-revenue generating sports get nothing but funding. The amount paid to each player is a uniform percentage, applied to each University, so just like the University of North Carolina’s program makes more than Gonzaga’s, it’s players should get more. No, this wouldn’t solve the problem of boosters and assorted hangers-on (what would?), but it would perhaps give these players something to look forward to after basketball other than a job at PepBoys and achy knees for life.
It’s fair, and it wouldn’t be very hard to do.
Somebody get the NCAA on the phone, pronto.
And before someone jumps in and says “isn’t the four year scholarship these guys get payment enough?”, fall back. Reality is, there are no four year athletic scholarships. Period. Scholarships are given for one year at a time, renewable at the end of each academic year at the coach’s discretion. Point being: if you suck or get injured, you will be sent home, since you can’t really do us good anymore. And this happens all the time.
For those who do actually graduate, you have to consider the rigors of literally playing sports as a full-time gig for 4 years. Modern athletics is a year-round cycle of pre-dawn training, chartered flights, and mandatory offseason workouts. There is little time for a “real” major, not with the extensive travel and practice schedules of most schools. Many of these guys come out after four years with some useless degree like criminal justice, sociology, or physical education. They might have been better off just forgoing college altogether and getting a job at Sizzler. The net-result is arguably the same.
So, for stickin’ it to The System and doing for self, at least in theory, I congratulate young Brandon Jennings, and hope to see him in the green room at MSG next Summer. And for continuing the facade of “student athletics”, when they know they’re just exploiting these young bamas, I extend a mystery finger to the NCAA. Until they figure out better ways of treating the very athletes they hump and dump each year, I hope Mr. Jennings has lots of copycats.
Good luck, young man. You’ll need plenty of it.
Questions (pick as many as you’d like): Do you think the NCAA should pay it’s athletes? What do you think of AB’s profit-sharing plan? Do you think Brandon Jennings will pan out in the Euroleague? Will his move become a movement if he does pan out? Should the NBA institute a two-year minimum? Do you have any idea why the photo above is so painful to me that I can hardly finish this sentence without breaking into hives?
Arizona signee Jennings heading for Europe [ESPN]
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, Barry 4 Prez, C.Y.I.N., Crap Music, Judge Joe Brown Says : "DO BETTER.", Knee-Grow Please, Mass Appeal, MLK is Crying Inside, Nigga Nonsense, Web Junk
It’s pretty hard to size up this “breaking news” story without getting the full context of what Jesse allegedly said. But since the Internet’s goin’ nuts, I guess I should weigh in.
Jesse Jackson would like to tell Barack Obama that he is sorry for ripping the presumptive Democratic Nominee with comments that are said to be very nasty and according to a report from CNN they are too bad for them to say on the air. One report notes that conservative radio host Sean Hannity revealed on air that that Fox News is in possession of an exclusive tape of Reverend Jesse Jackson, recorded after an interview when he thought the microphone was off, slamming Barack Obama for “talking down black people on matters of faith” among other issues.Jackson told CNN that the interview had wrapped up and he didn’t realize his remarks were captured by a “hot” microphone. In a helpful tip to folks like Jesse Jackson that they might want to understand that all microphones are live and hot and all cell phone have cameras and video.
“Barack, he’s talking down to black people,” Jackson said in a short clip the network aired this afternoon on “Special Report with Brit Hume.”
Hume reported that Jackson also “threatened to cut off a certain part of Obama’s anatomy.”
Here’s the offensive comment.
And here’s Jesse’s “apology”. I haven’t seen this sorta clumsy backpedaling since that one season Prime Time suited up for the Skins.
I’m sure you guys are looking for me to bash Jesse as being some obsolete relic of the Civil Rights era, but really, what’s the point? The man’s already done enough harm to his own reputation. He doesn’t need my help.
And besides, he’s completely and totally entitled to his opinion, just like anyone else who thinks Obama should be talking more about the “issues of Black America”. I don’t particularly agree with his assertion, as anyone who’s been here for some time knows, but Jesse’s done more than enough in his lifetime to earn the right to speak his mind. I’ll vouch for him on that one.
If nothing else, I’m disappointed that he for some reason thought he had to apologize. Andrew Young said some pretty greasy stuff about Obama a few months back, and I don’t think dude ever bothered sending calla lilies and a card reading “I’m so sorry”.[1]
Andrew Young’s Thug Thizzle > Jesse Jackson’s Tapdancing.
T(r)avis Smiley’s Crabs >>> Jesse Jackson’s Tapdancing.
AB Banning Bamas From The Comment Boards >>>>> Jesse Jackson’s Tapdancing.
True Hateration means never having to say you’re sorry.
I mean seriously, why is dude channelling Young Buck all of a sudden?
“A Nigga just get confused.” Classic.
Young Buck Cryin’ To 50 = Jesse Jackson’s Tapdancing.
If that’s what you meant, stand by your words! I’d have more respect from him if he just came out and was like “Yeah that’s right, I said it! So what you beige punk, you wanna make somethin’ of it? Come on! Let’s roll!”
But he had to apologize. Why?
Sadly enough, even Jesse Jr. (who’s a co-chair for the Obama campaign) jumped in the fray, throwing his own Daddy under Barry-4-Prez the bus. Huh?
His comments triggered condemnation from an unexpected source: Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), Jackson’s son.In a statement released by his office, Jackson Jr. said he was “deeply outraged and disappointed in Rev. Jackson’s reckless statements about Sen. Barack Obama.”
“His divisive and demeaning comments about the presumptive Democratic nominee — and I believe the next president of the United States — contradict his inspiring and courageous career,” the congressman said.
“Rev. Jackson is my dad and I’ll always love him,” he said. “He should know how hard that I’ve worked for the last year and a half as a national co-chair of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. So I thoroughly reject and repudiate his ugly rhetoric. He should keep hope alive and any personal attacks and insults to himself.”
What the hell is wrong with this Negro? I wouldn’t throw my Pops under nobody’s Greyhound. Bump dat’ Jesse Jr.! That’s some ole’ bullsh*t!
I’m sure the d-bags at Fox News (what the hell was Jesse doing over there in the first place?) will have a field day with this one, and point at it as more evidence that Obama is out of touch with the AverageBro. But let’s not forget, these are the same d-bags who were referring to Michelle-O as a “baby mama” just a few weeks ago.
Spare us the drama guys, we know you don’t care about us.
The more I think about it, the more I’m wondering if this whole thing wasn’t orchestrated on some level, just like my tin-foil hat musings theory about Rebb’n Wright’s comedy routine at the Press Club a few months back. Both incidents give Obama a clearcut opportunity to kick some member of the Whitey-scaring old guard (Farrakhan, Wright, Pfleger, Al, Jesse) to the proverbial curb, thus eliminating them as debate fodder.
These folks have run a relatively flawless campaign that’s on the verge of selling a biracial Junior Senator as the POTUS. Would you really put this past them?
I’m just sayin’. Think about it.
Question: Did Jesse owe Obama an apology? Is Jesse Jr waaay outta pocket for puttin’ his Pops on blast publicly? Is my conspiracy theory too far out there? Just how disturbed were you by that Young Buck/50 Cent audio?
Jesse Jackson Tape: Open Mic Catches Audio of Disparaging Obama Remarks [National Ledger]
Jesse Jackson Jr.: Jesse Jackson Sucks At Life [Wonkette]
Previous Editions of C.Y.I.N. Case Study [AB.com]
[1] Oh. I guess that’s just my thing.
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, Barry 4 Prez, C.Y.I.N., Go Sit Down, PoliTricks as Usual, White Men Gone Wild
I generally encourage progressive thought and action here at AB.com. I try to steer my readers free of Nigga Nonsense. I urge ya’ll to Take The AverageBro Challenge on the daily. I gave the youngins some New Man Laws for survival in today’s multinational economy. I told ya’ll about the harmful effects of Vocoders. Never accuse me of not caring about the betterment of my peoples.
And I always, whether subtly or overtly, try to encourage my AverageNation™ to master the fine art of Code Switching. It’s an essential skill for survival in Corporate America, right up there with making small talk about Tiger Woods, and pretending to be interested in stories about camping and/or marathons. You need to know this stuff if you’re gonna make it.
For the uninitiated, Code Switching is the art of being able to adjust the way you speak to match your environment. In short, you can’t talk barbershop level greasiness on a job interview.
Doing so would be the worst career decision since The Prince of Darkness[1].
And nobody wants to relive that.
Whites don’t generally have to Code Switch, and probably don’t even know such a concept exists. Sure, they know you exchange slang and “terrorist fist jabs” with the brothas in the mail room, then flawlessly spout sales profit margins to upper management minutes later. They thing is is some natural thing black folks can do “just because they’re black” like playing basketball and the Electric Slide. But they don’t realize this is actually a very delicate balancing act for most black folks with some trace level of hood in em’.
Cause I’m sure we’ve all messed up and let a random “axe” or “fittin’ to” slip out in a meeting once or twice. Or maybe that’s just me.[2]
So, watching perennial Presidential loser Ralph Nader rear his hatin’ ass head and spit reckless about Barry’s Code Switching has me extra pissed right about now, cause it seems like a guy so inquisitive would have figured this whole thing out by now.
Ralph Nader’s presidential candidacy has received little media attention, but his latest critique of Barack Obama has come under fire for it’s seemingly racial overtones.Speaking with Colorado’s Rocky Mountain News, Nader accused Obama of attempting to both “talk white” and appeal to “white guilt” in his quest to win the White House.
“There’s only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He’s half African-American,” Nader told the paper in comments published Tuesday. “Whether that will make any difference, I don’t know. I haven’t heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What’s keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn’t want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We’ll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards.”
Obama’s presidential campaign called those comments disappointing.
I’ll be honest here. Ralph Nader isn’t really saying anything we haven’t discussed at length several times on this very blog. The white-guilt factor. The not wanting to be a threatening Negro. The balancing act of pleasing Negroes and not scaring off whites. Whether being lightskinnded helps. Whether being biracial helps. And there’s that whole thing with Michelle.
I’m beginning to wonder if Spool32 is actually Nader himself.
So before I start jumping all over dude, I gotta admit, these paragraphs alone are more Real Talk than I’ve seen in every MSM outlet combined this year. He’s got a darn good understanding of all the racial dynamics at play. I can’t say I’ve seen another white dude dissect the whole field at play so thoroughly.
Maybe Ralph is actually biracial himself.
But here comes the problem.
Nader, the longtime consumer advocate who was blamed by many Democrats for Al Gore’s loss in the 2000 presidential election, said Obama’s top issue should be poverty in America, given his racial heritage.“I mean, first of all, the number one thing that a black American politician aspiring to the presidency should be is to candidly describe the plight of the poor, especially in the inner cities and the rural areas, and have a very detailed platform about how the poor is going to be defended by the law, is going to be protected by the law, and is going to be liberated by the law,” he said. “Haven’t heard a thing.”
Excuse me, but shouldn’t fixing urban America’s (read: Negroes) issues be something any President should address, regardless of his racial makeup? Why not hold John McCain to the same flawed standard?
That’s borderline racist right there, Ralph. You been hangin’ with Juan Williams or somethin’?
Nader also said Obama is making a concerted effort not to be “another politically threatening African-American politician.”“He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically he’s coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it’s corporate or whether it’s simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up.”
Nader formally entered the presidential race last spring, expressing disappointment with both remaining Democratic candidates at that time.
“They are both enthralled to the corporate powers,” he told CNN of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. “They’ve completely ignored the presidential pattern of illegality and accountability, they’ve ignored the out of control waste-fraud military expenditures, they hardly ever mention the diversion of hundreds of billions of dollars to corporate subsidies, handouts, and giveaways, and they don’t talk about a living wage.”
Sure, he’s technically correct on all accounts. But what exactly was the point of all this? Or course Obama’s “enthralled to the corporate powers”, you dummy. He didn’t get all that money for those 1.5M individual donors. It’s not even mathematically possible to get the paper he’s gotten so far without getting funded the old-fashioned way as well.
For all the talk about “Change”, that remains a constant: He with the most cash on hand usually prevails. And you don’t raise that sorta money without some help from the Big Guys. And those Big Guys will want a return on their investment. How much of a return they get will determine whether or not Obama’s Presidency is merely a feel-good moment in time or a true shift in the landscape of American politics. We’ll have to wait and see how that pans out.
But none of this is new news? Anyone with a brain understands this. So what’s Nader’s real point?
If you ask me, this guy’s just jealous. He’s usually the “sensible alternative”, which really means he’s nothing more than a spoiler who can screw the guy who loses by pulling away enough votes, as he did in 2000. This year, Obama’s not just the “sensible alternative”. He’s the “sensible frontrunner”, and he’s accomplished what he has by using some of Nader’s own tricks: grassroots level campaigning, appealing to young and apathetic voters, getting activists to drink the Kool Aid, selling hope and change, getting money from the Little Guys while cursing the Big Guys.
He just took some of Ralph’s concepts and made em’ better. Much better. Or since we’re code switchin…
“You made it a hot line, He made it a hot song.”[3]
Ask the guys in the mail room if you missed that one, Ralph. Dey know![4]
Question: What’s Ralph Nader’s friggin’ problem? Are you fluent in Code Switching? You got a Code Switchin’ Gone Bad story you wanna share with AverageNation™? Do it you-know-where.
Nader: Obama ‘Talking White’ [CNN]
[1] Yep, another obscure hip-hop reference. Cyber Capri Suns to the first person to break this one down.
[2] It isn’t just me? Is It?
[3] Name that tune.
[4] L-O! L-O!
[*] Props to EbonyGentleman for passing this one along.
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, Barry 4 Prez, C.Y.I.N., Go Sit Down, PoliTricks as Usual, White Men Gone Wild
I generally encourage progressive thought and action here at AB.com. I try to steer my readers free of Nigga Nonsense. I urge ya’ll to Take The AverageBro Challenge on the daily. I gave the youngins some New Man Laws for survival in today’s multinational economy. I told ya’ll about the harmful effects of Vocoders. Never accuse me of not caring about the betterment of my peoples.
And I always, whether subtly or overtly, try to encourage my AverageNation™ to master the fine art of Code Switching. It’s an essential skill for survival in Corporate America, right up there with making small talk about Tiger Woods, and pretending to be interested in stories about camping and/or marathons. You need to know this stuff if you’re gonna make it.
For the uninitiated, Code Switching is the art of being able to adjust the way you speak to match your environment. In short, you can’t talk barbershop level greasiness on a job interview.
Doing so would be the worst career decision since The Prince of Darkness[1].
And nobody wants to relive that.
Whites don’t generally have to Code Switch, and probably don’t even know such a concept exists. Sure, they know you exchange slang and “terrorist fist jabs” with the brothas in the mail room, then flawlessly spout sales profit margins to upper management minutes later. They thing is is some natural thing black folks can do “just because they’re black” like playing basketball and the Electric Slide. But they don’t realize this is actually a very delicate balancing act for most black folks with some trace level of hood in em’.
Cause I’m sure we’ve all messed up and let a random “axe” or “fittin’ to” slip out in a meeting once or twice. Or maybe that’s just me.[2]
So, watching perennial Presidential loser Ralph Nader rear his hatin’ ass head and spit reckless about Barry’s Code Switching has me extra pissed right about now, cause it seems like a guy so inquisitive would have figured this whole thing out by now.
Ralph Nader’s presidential candidacy has received little media attention, but his latest critique of Barack Obama has come under fire for it’s seemingly racial overtones.Speaking with Colorado’s Rocky Mountain News, Nader accused Obama of attempting to both “talk white” and appeal to “white guilt” in his quest to win the White House.
“There’s only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He’s half African-American,” Nader told the paper in comments published Tuesday. “Whether that will make any difference, I don’t know. I haven’t heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What’s keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn’t want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We’ll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards.”
Obama’s presidential campaign called those comments disappointing.
I’ll be honest here. Ralph Nader isn’t really saying anything we haven’t discussed at length several times on this very blog. The white-guilt factor. The not wanting to be a threatening Negro. The balancing act of pleasing Negroes and not scaring off whites. Whether being lightskinnded helps. Whether being biracial helps. And there’s that whole thing with Michelle.
I’m beginning to wonder if Spool32 is actually Nader himself.
So before I start jumping all over dude, I gotta admit, these paragraphs alone are more Real Talk than I’ve seen in every MSM outlet combined this year. He’s got a darn good understanding of all the racial dynamics at play. I can’t say I’ve seen another white dude dissect the whole field at play so thoroughly.
Maybe Ralph is actually biracial himself.
But here comes the problem.
Nader, the longtime consumer advocate who was blamed by many Democrats for Al Gore’s loss in the 2000 presidential election, said Obama’s top issue should be poverty in America, given his racial heritage.“I mean, first of all, the number one thing that a black American politician aspiring to the presidency should be is to candidly describe the plight of the poor, especially in the inner cities and the rural areas, and have a very detailed platform about how the poor is going to be defended by the law, is going to be protected by the law, and is going to be liberated by the law,” he said. “Haven’t heard a thing.”
Excuse me, but shouldn’t fixing urban America’s (read: Negroes) issues be something any President should address, regardless of his racial makeup? Why not hold John McCain to the same flawed standard?
That’s borderline racist right there, Ralph. You been hangin’ with Juan Williams or somethin’?
Nader also said Obama is making a concerted effort not to be “another politically threatening African-American politician.”“He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically he’s coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it’s corporate or whether it’s simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up.”
Nader formally entered the presidential race last spring, expressing disappointment with both remaining Democratic candidates at that time.
“They are both enthralled to the corporate powers,” he told CNN of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. “They’ve completely ignored the presidential pattern of illegality and accountability, they’ve ignored the out of control waste-fraud military expenditures, they hardly ever mention the diversion of hundreds of billions of dollars to corporate subsidies, handouts, and giveaways, and they don’t talk about a living wage.”
Sure, he’s technically correct on all accounts. But what exactly was the point of all this? Or course Obama’s “enthralled to the corporate powers”, you dummy. He didn’t get all that money for those 1.5M individual donors. It’s not even mathematically possible to get the paper he’s gotten so far without getting funded the old-fashioned way as well.
For all the talk about “Change”, that remains a constant: He with the most cash on hand usually prevails. And you don’t raise that sorta money without some help from the Big Guys. And those Big Guys will want a return on their investment. How much of a return they get will determine whether or not Obama’s Presidency is merely a feel-good moment in time or a true shift in the landscape of American politics. We’ll have to wait and see how that pans out.
But none of this is new news? Anyone with a brain understands this. So what’s Nader’s real point?
If you ask me, this guy’s just jealous. He’s usually the “sensible alternative”, which really means he’s nothing more than a spoiler who can screw the guy who loses by pulling away enough votes, as he did in 2000. This year, Obama’s not just the “sensible alternative”. He’s the “sensible frontrunner”, and he’s accomplished what he has by using some of Nader’s own tricks: grassroots level campaigning, appealing to young and apathetic voters, getting activists to drink the Kool Aid, selling hope and change, getting money from the Little Guys while cursing the Big Guys.
He just took some of Ralph’s concepts and made em’ better. Much better. Or since we’re code switchin…
“You made it a hot line, He made it a hot song.”[3]
Ask the guys in the mail room if you missed that one, Ralph. Dey know![4]
Question: What’s Ralph Nader’s friggin’ problem? Are you fluent in Code Switching? You got a Code Switchin’ Gone Bad story you wanna share with AverageNation™? Do it you-know-where.
Nader: Obama ‘Talking White’ [CNN]
[1] Yep, another obscure hip-hop reference. Cyber Capri Suns to the first person to break this one down.
[2] It isn’t just me? Is It?
[3] Name that tune.
[4] L-O! L-O!
[*] Props to EbonyGentleman for passing this one along.
