Examining Racial and Ethnic Reality Part 1: Introduction, Home and Hearth, and Education

 

Growing up in the United States in the 1960’s and 1970's, we were often told that “polite society” doesn’t publicly discuss religious, political, or sexual preferences.  Race was another such topic. Today, things have changed and it seems that everything is on the table.  There are those who seem to expect some sort of positive reinforcement for wearing their political, religious, racial, or sexual allegiance on their sleeve.

They feel entitled to an obligatory pat on the back, a celebratory ice cream cone, or handout, and when that reward isn’t forthcoming, they become offended, indignant, or defensive. They become upset that their life choices or fluke of genetics aren’t being rewarded or as impressive as they think they should be to others. 

You’re expected to embrace their world view or face being ostracized (aka “cancelled”), shouted down, physically attacked, or worse yet, being called a name and incredibly, they become indignant when they are the ones called out.  Race and ethnicity are such topics, and ones which warrant critical examination.  

Introduction

For example, when we examine race, we find something similar in the reaction. Individuals, almost two centuries removed, want not just sympathy for what some ancestor may or may not have endured, but they want to be compensated for what they never experienced. Those who look beyond color and (to quote Dr. Martin Luther King), judge people by the “content of their character” are often considered the worst offenders.

They behave as if this was a one off historical phenomena. Just one group--- white Europeans---were somehow solely responsible for the institution of slavery, forgetting that the most prolific dealers of human flesh weren’t Europeans, but the Arabs of Northern Africa (who put a premium on white flesh).

They give no thought to the historical fact that forced servitude has existed since Mankind existed. Every people and every race has at one time or another been slave and master. It’s a chain we all wear. They have also conveniently ignored the fact that it was these same white Europeans who all but put an end to this hateful institution or that they implemented legislation and taxpayer supported programs balance the scale that has existed since we roamed the African savannahs.

Equally, they’ve chosen to disavow the historical fact that it was their brethren who betrayed them and sold them into slavery, which sadly still continues to this day in Africa as well as parts of Asia. Perhaps the ancestors of the person on the street they randomly call “brother” or “sister” may been responsible for the plight of their ancestor, only to have later been caught up in the net? Such twists of fate aren’t as uncommon as one might think. It’s well documented that blacks owned black slaves in the U.S. or that native Americans had slaves of all races.

Nevertheless, for some reason, they “demand” to be compensated for what they aren’t entitled to (and arguably have already been given). They “demand” that the people who freed their distant ancestors from bondage must also assume some form of self-imposed “guilt” for doing so. Why is that? Is this anger at the people who delivered them from slavery justified or is it anger at themselves for not taking the initiative to free themselves and their refusal to place the blame where it truly belongs?

Shouldn’t their anger be more accurately directed to those who ensured their bondage in the first place, or is that just a little too close to home? If there is some sort of guilt to be had, perhaps it should be their failure to take responsibility for their own future, trading a “master” on a plantation for a politician or bureaucrat? What of the millions of immigrants who’ve come here from a different culture and customs, not speaking the language, and with next to nothing in their pockets, but have adapted very quickly?

They took advantage of the opportunities available, and as a people, kept their independence, and succeeded while the so-called “freed” people who’ve had the advantage of time, language and integration remain in a state of self-imposed bondage, blaming others for their poverty, broken homes, crime, high unemployment, alcoholism and drug abuse. If it was systematic, there should be few or no exceptions, but there are many.

In their anger at themselves, they lash out at others, such as in Cincinnati a few weeks ago, violently attacking individuals who were of no threat to them or looting the businesses of immigrants who’ve succeeded. Is this self-loathing, reversed racialism, opportunism or a combination? Let’s set aside emotions, pre-conceived ideas, and bias in order to examine the data and see what it can tell us.

Home and Hearth

According to the U.S Census Bureau, Whites have 50.5% of all live births while Blacks have 13.9%. Asians and Pacific Islanders are responsible for 6.2%. Native Americans have 0.7% of all live births, and Hispanics make up 25%. Nevertheless, the overall percentage of White and Black fertility rates have been in decline over the past several decades as has Native Americans.

 However, Hispanics, Asians, and Pacific Islanders on the other hand have seen their fertility rates increase, meaning that Asian and Hispanic populations are growing relatively faster than that of whites and blacks. By 2050, the U.S. is expected to reach a near racial parity with no dominate race. How that will work out remains a guess but often cited as a key factor for an eventual (and likely) balkanization of the United States.

A key factor in predicting the eventual success of a child is whether or not they are born in a dual or single parent homes. According to the Center for Equal Opportunity, Black Americans have the highest rate of illegitimate children. According to the Center, nearly 70% of Black children---69.3%-- are born out of wedlock. Compare that to 41.6% of Hispanics and 21.9% of Whites. It’s 59.3% for Native Americans. For Asians of Chinese origin, that number is 6.4% while Japanese Americans it’s 9.7%.

Two interesting asides worth mentioning are these. 45% of Black professionals (including managers) have had at least one illegitimate child compared to just 3% of White professionals.73% of Black high school students admit to having sex. That compares to 52% of Hispanic students and 44% of White students. Also, Black adults have the highest divorce rates while Asians have the lowest. Native Americans have the second highest and Hispanics have the second lowest.

When it comes to preschool care, Hispanic children are most likely to receive home centered care from a parent.  Black children are most likely to receive some form of home based care from a non-parent relative (like grandparent, aunt, uncle, etc.). White kids are most likely to receive home based care from a non-parent or relative such as a nanny or babysitter. Children of mixed race were most likely to receive preschool care from some sort of center (such as a daycare). When it came to subsidized care, Hispanic and black children were most often the beneficiaries.

The National Library of Medicine reported that Black infants tended to have lower birth weights than other groups. They also reported than less than 1/3 of children living at or under the national poverty rate took advantage of programs such as Head Start, and while Head Start tends to provide higher quality care than other centers, Black children receive poorer quality care compared to children of other races. The reasons cited were the birth weight (including high nutritional foods, as well a poor educational levels Black as well as Hispanic ethnicity, especially in family care centers.

 Interestingly, a 2013 study by the Centers for Disease and Prevention reported that 70% of Black fathers who live with their kids were active in their lives compared to 60% of Whites and 45% of Hispanics. 78% of Black fathers tended to have dinner with their children every day while 74% of White fathers and 64% of Hispanic fathers did. Additionally, 27% of Black fathers took their children to and from activities. By contrast, just 20% of White fathers did.  When it came to the all important homework and childcare, 41% of Black fathers stepped up. Meanwhile, only 29% of Hispanic fathers and 28% of White fathers helped out.  

Education

When it comes to graduation, Asian and White students have the highest rates with Asians leading the way. Among Asians and Pacific Islanders, the graduation rate is 94%. For Whites it’s 90%. Hispanic graduation rates are 83% while for Black students it’s 81% and 74% for Native Americans.  

Some additional statistics along the same lines that I found was that 68% of Asians have a bachelor’s degree or higher. That compares to just 25% of Hispanics and 44% of Whites.  On the other side of spectrum, just 4% of Asian had less than a high school diploma. Only 5% of Blacks didn’t have a high school degree along just 7% of whites. However, just over 20% of Hispanics lacked a high school diploma.

It bears mentioning the Black females graduate at a higher percentage than Black males. 64.1% go on to college and graduate. Of those, 71.5% earn a master’s degree, and out of those, an impressive 65.9% obtain a doctorate although more Black males  overall have a doctorate or professional degrees such as a law  or medical degree. It bears mentioning that Black female students face a unique hurdle their counterparts don’t.

For those that tend to be “overachievers”, they are often harassed or treated as social outcasts for their academic performance, often being accused as “acting White”, coming most often from their Black male peers. There have been instances reported where Black students have asked that they not be singled out publicly for some achievement or award to avoid being bullied.

 Some actively try to downplay their academic performance, and even join in with the “bad crowd” in order to blend in. Some have reported being coerced into skipping assignments or school, drinking, drugs, violence, crime, and sex in order no to stand out. The result is that they usually end up holding the proverbial  “bag” and sidetracking their lives.

Finally, it bears mentioning that there are 180 “Black Only” academic scholarships and over 25 “Hispanic Only” scholarships and about 12 scholarship programs directed toward Asian-Americans. Native Americans can apply for approximately 150 “Native American Only” scholarships plus individual tribal scholarships. As for Whites, there are none. The reason, it's argued, is that Whites aren't a minority (the U.S. Census Bureau would disagree. White males are in fact a minority). 

Nevertheless, as the counter argument runs, scholarships should not be based on racial or other quotas, but rather on financial need based on their social-economic situation. It’s also worth noting that prior to 2023, ranked racial quotas were used by many colleges and universities in order to increase  on campus “diversity”, even bypassing higher qualified candidates.

In part two of our look at race, we'll take a look at employment and unemployment, Affirmative Action and quotas, racial equality in politics, crime  and prison sentencing. Finally, we’ll address the issues of reparations, the future of race relations, and what does all this mean, if anything?

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

Trans-Saharan slave trade

Barbary slave trade

Barbary Pirates and English Slaves

Percentage of Births to Unmarried Women

Study: Black dads more involved in activities with theirchildren than other groups

Quality Disparities in Child Care for At-Risk Children:Comparing Head Start and Non-Head Start Settings

Fast Facts: Women of Color in Higher Ed

Race and Intelligence

First Divorce Rate by Age and Race/Ethnicity  

Some Thoughts on Reparations and Equality

As I stated in my previous article, the concept of "reparations" presupposes some injury or harm incurred as a result of inappropriate action taken by another party. In recent decades, the descendents of American slaves have been asking and demanding that they be compensated for the enslavement and treatment of their distant ancestors.

There's no question that the institution of slavery was and remains inhuman and barbaric, even though it continues today; mainly by Muslim terrorist groups who capture and sell mostly young Assyrian or Coptic Christian or Yazidi girls from Africa or the Middle East as sex slaves yet few react.

However, the Civil War in America ended in 1865, which ended 155 years ago. For most, that would be their 2x or 3x great grandparents. At what point is it simply too far back to matter? How would this be imposed? After all, not every black in America at the time was a slave. In fact, a few even owned slaves themselves. What about those who were slaves, but not in the United States or who came here after 1865? Then, what about children of mixed racial ancestry, are they entitled to some share of reparations? Does it matter if it happened 200 years ago or just last year?

What about Native Americans? They were not only held as slaves, but would often take captives as slaves---white, black, Hispanic, and even Asian. Should they receive compensated or is it a wash? We mustn't forget that some whites were enslaved as well. I'm not talking about indentured servitude which was a form type of slavery but one of limited duration with some type of compensation at the end of it, which was something slaves didn't get.

There was a small class of Europeans who were enslaved in America, often due to their inability to speak the language or understand the laws. Many remained that way for their entire lives, or for a few, until they could escape. Should they receive some reparation as well? Then there are Hispanics who also owned slaves (notably mostly Native Americans, but blacks and even Asians as well). Are they exempt, not because of the injustice was similar but because their skin is wrong color?

To muddy up the waters even more, what about those slaves who left no direct descendents? How are they to be remembered? What about those who were enslaved for a period, and then freed (often given land and livestock), are their descendents entitled to something for the time of their enslavement or does their freedom and land offset that?

Finally, how do we prove that someone is descended from an actual slave? Just being black for instance is not proof in itself that one is a descendant of African slaves. We also need to decide at what point culpability should begin in order to decide the degree of financial responsibility. We obviously want to make sure those responsible for slavery are the ones who ultimately pay for it right? That would be both the legal and moral thing to do.

In what would become the United States, the Spanish, French, Portuguese, Dutch, and English all had settlements here, and all were engaged in the slave trade (especially the Spanish who enslaved just about anyone who wasn't Spanish). Therefore, should those whose slave ancestry extended back to before the founding of the U.S. in 1776 look to one of those countries for compensation or should the U.S. Government do so on their behalf? Perhaps since so many countries are involved it should be taken up by the United Nations.

Of course, that brings up a technicality. For those whose ancestors were before 1776 and remained enslaved after that date, who would be primarily responsible? Those under whose jurisdiction they were originally enslaved or whose jurisdiction they became after the founding of the United States? Perhaps it should be split, but at what percentage? Anyway, the U.S. forbid the importation of slaves after 1807. So, if the ancestor came here between 1776 and 1807, the U.S. would obviously be solely responsible.

Since we're interested in culpability, let's not stop there. African slaves acquired by the slave traders obviously from Africa, but how? African tribes were in near constant war with neighboring tribes. Anyone captured was usually enslaved, either for use by the victor or sold off to another tribe (on some occasions, the chief would enslave some local troublemaker or someone who had something he wanted).

With the arrival of Europeans, a new customer was added to the mix. The tribal chief would bring captured individuals to a port where they would be inspected and purchased, which turned into a highly profitable business. In addition, Arab merchants were active purveyors of slaves; buying and selling not just Africans, but Asians, and even any Europeans they managed to capture off ships. Among some the practice still continues. Muslim Arabs have been taking Africans as slaves since at least 652 AD.

Of those brought to America, practically all came from just two regions. The first was Senegambia, which is the area between the Senegal and Gambia rivers which comprises today's Senegal, Gambia, Mali, and Guinea-Bissau. This area alone counted for just half of all slaves brought to this country. The second area was in the west-central Africa making up the countries of Angola, Gabon, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo and areas around the Congo River.

Finally, the rest came from the "Slave Coast" of today's Ghana and Ivory Coast. A small percentage originated from an inlet called the "Bight of Biafra" on the Nigeria and Cameroon coast. It should be pointed out that according to most historians, only 3.5% of all slaves sold were brought to North America. The bulk went the Caribbean (notably Jamaica and the Lesser Antilles), central and south America to work alongside native populations.

So, since these are now nations, who were actively and willingly engaged in the slave trade business (in fact, they were pivotal to its success), shouldn't they be responsible for the lion's share of any reparations? What about the Muslim terrorists who continue the practice? How do we deal with that? And surely we mustn't forget all the institutional churches or their religious orders who owned slaves. They shouldn't be allowed to hide behind their altars.

Now we need to give some thought to individual responsibility. Since many people (erroneously) believe the Civil War was all about the issue of slavery, how are we going to treat those who fought for the North and the South? Are those whose ancestors were Confederates to pay a higher percentage while those whose ancestors served in the Union to pay less? What if the Confederate ancestor owned no slaves as the vast majority did (just under 4% of all Southerners at the time owned any slaves whatsoever), are they equally responsible? What if a Union ancestor did own slaves, as many from the border states of Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri did?

What compensation or offset should anyone whose ancestor died for the North receive? After all, "if" the war was all about slavery and they gave their life or was wounded, shouldn't that count for something? What about Quakers? Many of my ancestors were Quakers, and they were the most staunch of Abolitionists and who made up most of the Underground Railroad. Without their influence, slavery may never have ended.

Should some consideration be given to those whose more recent ancestors were involved in the education of former slaves or who, in defiance of local norms, risked their livelihoods and even their lives to employ blacks, Native Americans, Asians, or migrant Hispanic sharecroppers? What about those who participated in the Civil Rights Movement such as the "Freedom Riders", or worked to bring about equal housing, equal employment, ending poll taxes (all of which affected poor whites as well)? Several of the Freedom Riders were beaten up and at least three were murdered.

My questions aren't intended to be taken totally as sarcasm or rhetorical. They are intended to point out that this is a highly complex issue with numerous factors to consider. 75% of blacks believe they are entitled to reparations while 85% of whiles strongly oppose it. 42% of Hispanics said they would support some type of reparations. Of course, those on the Left tend to support some form of reparation while those on the Right oppose it, and many on both sides oppose any form of cash compensation.

So, how much are we talking about anyway? At this point, no one really knows, but estimates have put the figure as high as $15 billion up to $5 trillion dollars. In a time where the federal government is $26 trillion dollars in debt (which takes about 81% of our GDP), and with most states as well as local governments broke, that seems unlikely. So, what other solutions are there? Tax credits? The government needs every tax dollar it can get. Some have proposed grants for higher education.

However, we need to consider the fact that there are already numerous scholarships and grants which are race based (whites are excluded). The United Negro College Fund is one such organization along with the Congressional Black Caucus Fund, while hundreds of colleges and universities offer race based programs, including reduced tuition. In fact, there are literally dozens of such programs making millions of dollars available. There are also 37 black only colleges and universities. Something no other race is afforded.

There have been countless government programs since 1865 which have empowered not just former black slaves, but all minorities and those of low income. The same goes for housing, medical care, daycare, employment, and so forth across the social network. The opportunities are there for those willing to take advantage of them.

What neither the government nor society can do, however, is force individuals to take advantage of the opportunities given to them. They can't keep individuals from destroying property or neighborhoods, especially when they don't have a vested interested in it; the taxpayers do. They can't make people learn, especially when high academic achievement is disparaged as "acting white".

They can't make people take jobs, even though they are given preference due to their race and not their qualifications, and they certainly can't make them either do their job, let alone excel at it since they assume that race or some other qualifier provides a form of disciplinary insulation. In lieu of that, shouldn't everyone be treated and measured according to their abilities and performance instead?

Reparations are about compensation for an injury. When that injury is as old as Mankind, what is just? How do we balance that with the fact that at one time or another, every people on the planet has been slave and slave owner. No one is without guilt. I think the best form of reparation is equality and insuring that it will never happen again to anyone or any group. In America, and in much of the world, that's been done. It's not perfect. Nothing usually is, but it's a good start, and it will take all of us working together to make it better.



What part of Africa did most slaves come from?

Where Did African Slaves Come From And Where Did They Go?

2020 Democrats have started to clash over slavery reparations, but new poll shows most liberal support the idea

Most oppose reparations for slavery: poll